Thursday, October 29, 2009

Uk Companies By Market Cap List

Stefano Cucchi Massacre in death by cops in prison: 20g of marijuana ....


Do you remember "Midnight Express" (Midnight Express) by Alan Parker?
this:
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuga_di_mezzanotte

thought that these things could happen only in countries like Turkey or 70 years of Pinochet's Chile ... where the fuck we live?

article by Adriano Sofri:
MEMORY
Thursday, October 15, 2009 At about 23:30
Stefano Cucchi was stopped by police in the park of the aqueducts in Rome.

Friday, October 16 at 1:30 am in the morning they arise, with Stephen, at the home of the family Cucchi in Via Ciro da Urbino, two men in civilian clothes, then had qualified as a police and two other policemen in uniform in the barracks Appia Claudio. They begin to search the room of Stephen while he reassures his mother telling her "quiet, so they do not find anything." In fact, anything found in his room, refusing to search the rest of the study and, even after an invitation from the family to proceed. The police in turn reassure family members, saying that Stephen was a little surprised with "stuff" on him (20 gr. Mainly marijuana, cocaine and two little pills, according to news filtered through areas of law enforcement and prosecutors, " ecstasy "second father" of Rivotril, "a life-saving medicine epilepsy, prescrittogli regularly by your doctor). The police also stated that the next day would be celebrated at 9 am for summary trial in the courtrooms of Piazzale Clodius. At about 12 o'clock in the morning Stefano arrives in the courtroom, escorted by four policemen. Her face is very swollen, in striking contrast to its thinness (the parents say that his weight before his arrest is about 43 kg) and has very showy bruising around the eyes. During interrogation by the court, pleads guilty to "possession of drugs, but as a consumer." Stephen at nearly 13 is led away, handcuffed, by police, after the ruling of trial (hearing scheduled for November 13th) with a remand prison. At 14 is at the clinic visited the Palace of Justice, where are found "injury ecchimodiche lower eyelid bilaterally in the region and where Stephen says" injury to the sacral region and lower limbs. The police then led him to Regina Coeli prison in the custody of the police. On entering the prison will undergo a medical examination which reveals the presence of "coccygeal sacral bruising, swelling of the face bilateral orbital, algia gait." Fatebenefratelli is then transported to hospital for further controls: in particular, back and skull X-rays, which are not made at that time inside the prison. In the hospital diagnosed "the L3 vertebral body fracture and a fracture of his left dell'emisoma coccygeal vertebra.

Saturday, October 17th During the morning is again visited by two doctors of Regina Coeli, where it will again have to be transferred to Fatebenefratelli. Hence, during the morning (13.15 hours), Sandro Pertini is transferred to the hospital. The family is notified of the admission of Stephen at only 21. At approximately 22 parents present to the emergency room and are directed to the "hall detainees." The stem will be asked if you can see the patient, but the answer that is given to families is: "This is a prison and the visits are not possible." To the precise question put to him by his parents, how is Stephen Cucchi? The column makes them wait and then invite them to return the following Monday (from 12 to 14), to speak with the doctors. Monday, October 19

Parents traveling at 12 am in Hall held the steering column and repeat the request to visit Stephen. Shall be seated in the vestibule, the documents are taken and pending a superintendent to ask just out of the department which is the health of the child. The superintendent's response is: "The boy is quiet, but again denied parents the opportunity to interview the doctors on the ground that the authorization of the prison has not yet arrived. And in the face of parents who want to specify only talk to the doctors, and do not even have a conversation with his son, the same supervisor asks them to reappear the next day, stating that permission for the following day would surely arrived.

Tuesday, October 20 At 12 the parents go back to "Pertini", repeating the request to the stem to visit Stephen. This time the column deny them entry, saying - and is the first time it is said explicitly - that "both for interviews with detainees and for those with the doctors should ask permission of a Judge of the Court Square Clodius."

Wednesday, October 21 At 12:30, the father of Stephen, after a morning spent in court, he obtained permission of the Judge of the seventh section for interviews. He decides not to go to Regina Coeli visit to get a permit because the relevant office closes at 12.45 pm, referring everything to the next day. Thursday, October 22

Stefano Cucchi dies at 6:20 in the morning. The medical certificate issued by the hospitals and clinics speaks of 'presumed natural death'. At 12:10 pm a policeman comes to your home Cucchi, finding only the mother of the boy, his father having gone to Regina Coeli for the visa, and ask them to follow him to the police station for communications. The lady can not, being alone with her grandchild, and so the policeman said that he would return later. At 12.30 am the mother of Stephen is notified of the decree authorizing pm with the appointment of a consultant of the parties. It is in this way that Mrs. Cucchi learns of his son's death. Both parents are traveling to Pertini, where the superintendent and the doctor on duty say they "have not been able to see his face because it was constantly on the sheet face." Then rushed to the morgue of the Institute of Medicine office where they presented their shocking image: the face of her son devastated, almost completely swollen, the right eye returned to the bottom of the orbit, the left eyebrow in abnormally swollen, the right jaw with a groove vertical, indicate a fracture, the teeth ruined. Friday, October 23

is carried out the autopsy. Part of the consultant appointed by the family, is not allowed to take photographs. The body of Stephen Cucchi
now weighs 37 kg (Adriano Sofri)

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Black Volleyball Shoes

18. Theocracy

Although it is not a form of government, religion affects politics, so much so that, in a book about politics, one can not ignore it. Here I limit myself to consider Catholicism and I do it by borrowing the thought of John Paul II.

18.1. According to the ineptitude of the individual
Pope, the man is unable to discern between good and evil. In fact, "the power to decide good and evil does not belong to man but to God alone" (John Paul II 1993: 35). Man is only free to obey God, and he must do so through the Church. "When people ask the Church the questions raised by their consciences, when in the Church the faithful turn to their Bishops and Pastors, the Church's reply contains the voice of Jesus Christ, the voice of truth about good and evil. In the words spoken by the Church there resounds, in people, the voice of God "(John Paul II 1993: 117).
According to the church, not worth the personal point of view, nor the commitment to deepen the truth by individuals who, by definition, can not get to the truth. It does not even constitute the majority principle. The moral law, in fact, "is not in any way established by following the rules and forms a kind of democratic deliberation" (John Paul II 1993: 113).

18.2. Dictatorship by choice
What kind of government can emerge from these ideological presuppositions? Certainly not a democratic government.
For example, let's see how he developed his political thinking a Catholic priest, who answers to the name of RJ Neuhaus (1994). After expressing some appreciation of democracy and the principle of majority, the scholar notes that not always what the majority approves necessarily correspond to the truth (p. 90). One might expect at this point, Neuhaus discover that the individual be as free and independent thinking, and say that he is the true engine of human progress. But it turns out that the religious wants nothing less than free "from the bars of the autonomous self" and deliver the individual to the church and the pope (p. 94-5). "Bound his allegiance to something greater than themselves, Catholics know that they become something more than what they are. In other words, freedom is not being true to yourself, but be free with the truth "(p. 103). Surrender their autonomy of thought here is the aspiration of the Catholic! I would feel satisfied if
Neuhaus at least admit this: the good Catholic give up their freedoms for the sake of God But no: he emphasizes the importance of freedom, to affirm that "where freedom is not assured, nothing is safe "(p. 166). Is perhaps the religious, referring to freedom of thought? He wants, perhaps, say that the Catholic is free to fight for what he believes, in good conscience, right and true? Not at all. This freedom is not allowed! The only freedom that is granted is to submit to the authority of religion and become a slave of the institution of the Church. "Freedom is given to man to make possible the free obedience to truth and free self-giving love" (p. 173). This profiled by Neuhaus is certainly the most savage and oppressive dictatorships, the desired by choice: from dictatorship imposed from the outside can, sooner or later, freed from dictatorship, but that you yourself choose who you can never leave?
There is no need to read a book by a Catholic you know where it is going. Whatever the argument, the conclusion is always the same: the self-denial and of his freedom of thought. The Catholic is one who has his own brain to the pope, saying, "I do not need, you manage them. He can not be convinced of anything, because it must always follow the Pope's position. If a Catholic, for example, was deeply convinced that Christ would approve the use of contraceptives, he could not support and promote that thought until the pope should be a different view. If a Catholic scientist, after many trials, to come and discover a substance capable of making man more intelligent and unselfish and has no negative effects and wanted to promote its use to make a better world, believing it to obey the command of Christ " multiply your talent, "he would not be a good Catholic if you did not obtain the approval of the pope.
The church does not recognize the freedom of thought. But then what good Catholic to undertake in order to progress, then if what he believes to be true and right is vetted by the pope? What they need the brain? Why would God with free thought and self-employment? The study costs sacrifice. Might as well keep quiet and be guided. The doctrine of the church leads the citizen to an obedient and submissive attitude and in so doing, it becomes antithetical to any form of democratic government and functional paternalistic and authoritarian governments, but these should be the product of a "free" choice of the person.

18.3. Advantages and limitations
The main advantage of a theocratic regime is to exclude all doubt personal and social horizon.
The main disadvantage can be identified in the denial of freedom of thought and conscience of people.

Usaa Debit Card Number

17. Federalism

In a political sense, the term federalism (Latin foedus: covenant, agreement, alliance) indicates a 'contract' between sovereign states, which ceded some of their sovereignty and are combined to form a single political body order, declared or not, to increase its strength and ensure favorable conditions for domestic peace and opportunity in the economic field, but also to ensure that the rights of citizens are respected in individual countries. According to Montesquieu, the federation can add the benefits of the republic with that of the monarchy, ie the benefits of the rule of law with that of a state big and strong. "Composed of small republics, it [the Federation] enjoy the goodness of the internal governance of each, then from the outside, possesses, thanks to the strength of the association, all the advantages of large monarchies "(Laws, IX, 1).
For their part, citizens participate in choosing the federal government, according to the principle of 'one citizen, one vote. " In the end, writes Elazar, "Federalism involves connecting individuals, groups and political communities in a lasting union but limited, so as to allow the energetic pursuit of common goals while maintaining the integrity of all parties" (1998 : 6-7). It is, in the words of KC Weare, a "system of division powers enabling the central government and regional ones to be, each in his sphere, coordinated and independent "(1997: 26). How
first known federation in history usually indicates that ancient Israel, while the most important example of medieval federalism is the "confederation of republics of the Swiss mountains, formed in 1291 and aimed at mutual aid in the defense of ' independence "(Elazar 1998: 102]. However, the f. reached maturity with the establishment of the American federal system and has expanded continuously over the past two centuries, and today is seen as a viable alternative to nationalism.
According to A. Lijphart, "you can identify five key features of federalism: a written constitution, the bicameral system, the right of unit members to be involved in the process of amending the federal constitution, but the ability to amend their constitution unilaterally, but not non-proportional representation of the units making up the smallest room in the federal and devolved government "(1988: 182).

17.1. The constitution
Because there can be orderly and peaceful coexistence among sovereign states is necessary that they be equipped with the equivalent force, establish clear agreements and define precisely the powers of each. Hence the importance of a written constitution, which, in principle, gives the federal government control of foreign policy, the right to declare war and mint money, while letting individual states much greater freedom to legislate in all other areas of public interest, such as health, taxation, education and social services, with the exception of the right to withdraw from the federation (this right, in fact, is denied.)

17.2. Federations and confederations
model is different confederations: the Confederation holders of rights and duties are not individuals but states, which enjoy equal terms enshrined in the principle "one state, one vote." The participation of a Member of the Federation is voluntary and revocable, and nobody can interfere in the internal affairs of another state. "Even in cases of blatant violation of basic human rights, as in the case of genocide, the federal government may intervene in the internal affairs of a State. The rights of individuals have no other protection in a confederation than that accorded to them by individual states (Archibugi, Beetham, 1998: 92-3).

17.3. The state of federalism
In theory it is possible a federation of states ruled by dictatorships, but in practice the Fed is more suited to systems Republicans. Hardly, in fact, a dictator would agree to limit its power. In theory it is also possible to agreement between the federal states which differ in terms of military strength and economic resources, in practice, however, the agreement is more likely that these differences are less pronounced because, normally a state is much stronger than another tends to dominate rather than to consider an equal partner. In fact, a political organization is a federal attractive only to those who will enjoy a relatively prosperous economic condition and not have to beware of dangerous enemies (usually these are countries in which liberal democratic systems of type), which means so ensure conditions of peace and consolidate their positions. On the contrary, in case of economic crisis or serious external threat, the need to establish a prevailing centralized government. "The war and the economic crisis require a control unit if you want that their problems are actually solved, and require financial efforts that only central governments are able to bear" (Wheare 1997: 375).
As liberals, federalists see also "freedom as more important than the fight for absolute equality" and "are willing to sacrifice some degree of equality for the sake of freedom" (in POZZOLI 1997: 300). "Since power is not in session in a single center, in the federal state are the most favorable conditions for local self-government "(LEVI 1998: 379). On this basis, the DD may prevail and prosper. Federalism is thus compatible with both the DR as the DD, although today there are only models DR.
According to Elazar, republicanism and constitutionalism are the pillars of federalism. "The will to federate means just that: the desire to build a political community based on a composite of republican principles, embodied in an appropriate constitutional framework and presenting as a key element in the sharing of power" (Elazar 1998: 160].

17.4. The reasons of federalism
coexist on earth about three thousand ethnic and tribal groups tied to their identity and their own traditions. The risk of violent conflict between these groups is high and explode, to avert, in the course of history has generally resorted to force. "Always people have defended their independence, and have ensured their safety with Arms (ALBERTINI 1999: 183). But since the American Revolution, it was discovered that there is another way to live peacefully with the various populations that occupy the planet, federalism, which, since nuclear weapons have made it very dangerous for all of the custom of appealing to the war as the final arbiter in disputes between human groups, "responds to the needs of peoples and political communities to come together to pursue common goals, but remain separate to preserve their integrity" (Elazar 1998: 28 ]. It is, in other words, a compromise between the need for regional self-government and central government requirements, including requirements to maintain their own local values \u200b\u200band needs to be part of a community large enough to best meet the needs of the individual .

17.5.
model of federalism "There are three main models of modern federalism: the American, Swiss and Canadian (Elazar 1998: 35], and they are all DR systems with two levels of citizenship and representation in the sense that "everyone is at the same time a citizen of your country and the federation" (Levi 1997: 90) and contributes to elect respective governments. Depending on operating at one or more states, the f can be divided into national and supranational levels, and it is also possible to imagine a world f.. This is the dream of Kant. "peoples, as Member can be judged as individual men [...] and each of them can and must require the other to join with him in a constitution similar to a civilian, in which each player is guaranteed his right. This would a federation of peoples, which however should not be a State of nations "(2002: 60). In practice, the Prussian philosopher think of a world federation, to be made on the basis of a 'contract', as the one signed by individuals in the state of nature. Along the same line moves Proudhon, who considers the sub-Federalism the first step to reach the supranational level.

17.6. Federalism and the Justice
f. world requires the establishment of an international legal order, governing relations between States by preventing them from going to war, but not any legal order, but an order just enough that it can be shared. In fact, if the order was perceived as unfair by some Member States, it could only exist as an order imposed and it would be easy to predict the emergence of hotbeds of tension that could endanger the state of peace. From a peace imposed by an unjust law could cause an unbearable social system. Hence the need to accompany the f. with some form of justice, as the only guarantee of political stability. Until now the f. world is a dream unrealized. However, there are two important cases of f. supranational: the U.S. and the EU.

17.7. The American model
The birth of a political community can take place in three different ways: first, for armed conquest, completed in authoritarian regimes, and secondly, to spontaneous evolution (from family, tribe, village, city, state), and resulted in oligarchic regimes and thirdly for the covenant, that is, following voluntary agreement between the parties, and resulted in the democratic regime-federal (Elazar 1998: 4-5). The federation of the United States of America and belongs to the latter group represents the first example of a union of states for Republicans took place not by a historical process or force, but following an agreement among free peoples. This is why Hamilton can say with heartfelt satisfaction: "Being able to launch at a moment of absolute peace, with the voluntary consent of all the people, the Constitution is a marvel as I look at the implementation of the anxiety with trembling "(HAMILTON, MADISON, JAY 1997: 693).
At the time when the English colonies of America are fighting for their independence, two forms of government are deemed capable of administering a large and powerful state: the monarchy, where all powers are centralized in the person of the sovereign, and the republic, where power is exercised by representatives elected by the people. And democracy? In the eighteenth century the only conceivable form of democracy is to live. "In a democracy - Madison writes - the people gather and groom directly" (1997: 215). But this form Government, in agreement with what has already been expressed by Aristotle and Rousseau, is considered suitable only for small communities, however, for being small, can not compete with the great monarchies and republics, large and therefore do not provide sufficient security to its citizens in case of aggression.
Well, after the proclamation of independence (04/07/1776), Americans believe more in line with its spirit of free republican model, but they wonder whether they should be limited to thirteen sovereign republics, or whether it is better to create a single federal state, even bigger and more powerful. In the end, that is unique in modern history, Americans choose the compromise and write the Federal Constitution. The establishment of the Constitution is a historical novelty and breaks a long tradition according to which the foundation of a state is the result of chance or an act of force. Thanks to the Constitution, a state or a federation of states may arise through the freely expressed will of the democratically approved by some and with consent of the people with nothing left to chance and without bloodshed. Even the system of the Federal Constitution is a matter of novelty, being the federal guidance stranger to European culture (Switzerland is an exception).
What kind of government Americans want to build with the Constitution? So For starters, they want to find an alternative to the monarchy, which at that time is the most successful form of government, but opposed to their free spirit. Having rejected the monarchy, the republic remains, namely the form of government where the people "meet and manage through their representatives and delegates." However, if the thirteen states would join the federation would "combine the advantages of a monarchy with those of a republican regime" (1997: 186). In the federal state, in fact, combine the advantages of the monarchy (central government, strong and secure) and the republican liberal (democratic rights). But that is not a true democracy is demonstrated by the fact that they are excluded from citizenship of blacks, Indians and women (the right to vote is granted to blacks and Indians in 1870 and women in 1920). The goal of Americans is to build a democracy but a country with more liberal, the largest and most powerful as possible, in short, a federal republic, which is only improperly called democracy.
The U.S. Constitution does not include any reference to the individual and his rights, while speaking of Governments, the States, the President and the powers (executive, legislative, administrative and judicial). In short, we find a logical group rather than individual logic. "In United States, the executive power is entrusted to one person, the President of the federation. The Ministers are appointed by the President and responsible to him. He combines in his hands the powers of head of state and head of government, not accountable for its actions to the legislature, but to the people who elected him and can confirm or revoke its trust every four years "(LEVI 1997: 52). The president also heads the country's foreign policy, commands the armed forces, appoints civil servants and judges of the Supreme Court. His term lasts four years and may be replicated once. The Congress can not discouraged, but just put it in a state of accusation (impeachment ). It is, in essence, a system of "separated powers and balanced" (Barber, FUSARO 1997: 58), whose main advantage is the stability, but that is not without limits. One limitation is that the people elect the candidate generally more attractive and sympathetic, but is not necessarily what has the best qualities to steer the second is that if the president and parliament are not willing to cooperate, the system block (BARBERA, Fusaro 1997: 62-3).
The relationship between the Member is not hierarchical and is governed by the Constitution, which is above all powers, both state and federal, and observance of which is guaranteed by the judiciary independent. In addition, the Constitution is only the people, the only one in which Hamilton gives the power to change it. "In essence, sovereignty belongs to the federal people and is exercised through various centers of power" (LEVI 1997: 37). What comes out in the end is a "government of laws and not of men" (LEVI 1997: 47).
In the end, it is well recognized, the f. represents the closest thing to democracy there, and most importantly, with the interesting prospect of a global involvement. "The federal democracy made possible the formation of a democratic government on a continental scale, which potentially can be widened to the whole world "(LEVI L. 1997: 45).

17.8. Federalism in Europe
The American model has a strong attraction in the Old Continent, where, along with the Enlightenment principles, results represent a sort of explosive mixture, which carved out the contemporary Europe. In Europe, however, the f. struggling to assert itself, while the monarchy continues to prevail. Unlike previous centuries, however, it is more autocratic regimes, but with various forms of parliamentary systems of law and suffrage. In this new cultural climate is no place for the Federal Court, which he sees taking place Saint-Simon, Augustin Thierry, Kant, and others, but only at the level of principle.
In Italy the political debate on liberal democracy and federalism is developed only after the fall of Napoleon and creates a series of anti-monarchist movement, hailing the constitutional charters, the liberal principles and federalism. Among the most ardent supporters should be reminded of an Italy federal Carlo Cattaneo (1801-69), which is a strong supporter of local, as well as the creation of the United States of Europe. But his views are a minority. Cattaneo is considered a loser and is forced to live on the margins of political power, along with a few that share the ideas, such as Giuseppe Ferrari (1811-76), Giuseppe Mazzini (1805-72) and Carlo Pisacane (1818-57), which are carriers of a thought of a socialist and egalitarian, secular and anticlerical antispiritualistico. Ferrari also wants an Italy federalist and republican, while Pisacane advocates the abolition of all hierarchy, all authority and all property and dreams of a nation composed of many common democratically governed. But Ferrari and Pisacane are losers as well as all those after them, have continued to advocate the f., as Spinelli (1907-86).
Condemned (1927), because of his faith community and its anti-fascism in the first ten years in prison and then to exile in 1937, entered into a critical policy with the USSR, Spinelli was expelled from the Communist Party and became a fervent advocate of federalism esuropeo, which will keep him busy until his death (cf. Graglia 2008). In 1941, while he is in exile on the island of Ventotene, Spinelli writes Problems of European federation, in which, together with Ernesto Rossi and Eugenio Colorni, expresses its determination to implement in the United States of Europe. The book will be published illegally in January 1944 and will go down in history as Manifesto Ventotene . The idea of \u200b\u200bfederalism Spinelli was born from a condition of criticism of the nation-state and war, in a time when a war is upsetting the old balance, and each requires a reorganization of States. "A free and united Europe is necessary premise to the strengthening of modern civilization, which the totalitarian era is an arrest" (p. 23). Spinelli wants to implement an international order in Europe "through a federal system, which, while leaving each state the opportunity to develop its national life in a way that best fits the position and characteristics of its civilization [...], writing and manages a body of international laws to which all alike are to be submitted "(p. 60), leading to the handover of sovereignty by individual states the Federal Government in an irrevocable way. Spinelli thinks Europe rising together from the rubble of a war that saw the loser Germany (p. 70-1), breaking with centuries of tradition in favor of the nation states. In truth, Spinelli is also believed to a socialist Europe, where private property is "abolished, limited, proper" (p. 24) and is guaranteed for all "a decent standard of living" (p. 26).
in Europe today are federal only Belgium, Germany, Spain and Switzerland, but is looming and a new epoch-making event: the same as Europe moves towards a federal organization. "The need to unify Europe is obvious. Existing states are powder without substance. None of them able to bear the cost of a self-defense. Only the union can make them last. The problem is not between independence and union, there is between the U.S. and the fade "(ALBERTINI 1999: 140-1). The EU federalism is an element of novelty in history and, in fact, while the former federations or a variant form of national unification (Switzerland) or the result of a movement of liberation from colonial domination (the United States, Canada and Australia) The EU is the first case of tolerance of peaceful nations historically established, the product of the will to overcome the nationalistic laceration of the human race.

17.9. Federalism vs. Republicanism Italian USA (from Zincone 1995)
Italy runs to Europe, which, in turn, runs toward the U.S. model. But Italy will come to endorse the American model? Judging from his history, probably not, it is expected, however, an approach with a compromise solution.
Characters of American democracy / Italian democracy

1. Federalism and decentralization of power / state and centralization
2. Presidential / parliamentary
3. Been minimal, especially in economy / multiparty and consociativismo
4. Two-party electoral system and / mixed electoral system
5. Counterweights the power of the majority (Supreme Court, opposition party, the means of mass communication is not subject to the executive) / counterweight to the power of the majority (President of the Republic, opposition parties)
6. Relevant power of lobbies / Relevant power of lobbies and the papacy
7. Public opinion in favor of "democracy and public opinion in favor of democracy, but with some nostalgia for the recent past dictatorial monarchy.

17:10 World Federalism
If you fail to realize the European Federation, there is no reason you can not do the same worldwide. Proponents of federalism world fear that, as long as there will be only one sovereign state and armed, world peace will be in jeopardy. There are many today see the world federalism the best way to govern all the peoples of the earth. According to Levi, for example, "after the city-state, understood as the institution which has permission to pacify the tribes, the state and nation, which has ensured peace between the cities, the federation is the form of political organization that allows to bring peace to nations and to unite entire regions of the world and around the world in perspective "(1998: 380). The same thought is developed by M. Albertini. "Direct democracy - the scholar writes - it was the democratic government of men belonging to the sphere of a city [...]. Representative democracy was the democratic government of men belonging to a nation [...]. [...] The federal system is the rule of men belonging to a supranational space, and can reach up to that of the whole world "(1999: 57). According to Albertini, the vocation of federalism is the conquest of the world, because "federal democracy can not function if it has a stable, global" (1999: 58). Daniele Archibugi is about
cosmopolitan democracy, "an extremely ambitious project whose objective is to achieve a world order inspired by the values \u200b\u200bof legality and democracy" (1998: 66). He is convinced that there can be no democracy without local democracy globally. "The national democracy and global democracy are two sides of same coin, and without the achievement of both the journey to democracy is likely to be interrupted tragically" (Archibugi, Beetham 1998: 86). Members of the system are so cosmopolitan states and citizens. The example that comes closest to the model of cosmopolitan democracy is the European Union. Inside there are two fundamental principles: "one state, one vote" and "a citizen, one vote." It is a democracy of states and citizens.

17.11. An open question: the division of power and federalism individualistic
Federated States are not ordered in a hierarchy, as is the case between the equipment of a unitary state, but divided between them the power: none of the concentrates all power in their hands, while each is a recognized ' fiscal autonomy (fiscal federalism) and administrative. The existence of the federation is based on constitutional requirements, which must be written and so hard and have a value higher than that of ordinary laws. Federalism is not opposed to the idea of \u200b\u200bthe state, but only to that of centralized power. It demands that power be divided. But torn between whom? That's the point.
Take, for example, Italy. The Federalists say: "It is not that power remains concentrated in Rome, it is good to be part of the periphery". But what is the periphery? First of all regions. According to the federalist project, each region should become a sovereign mini-state, contained in a larger state, which is Italy. One wonders, "Why the federalist logic should not apply even within a single region?" We take Sicily. Because the power should remain concentrated in Palermo, and not divided between the provinces? Then, however, municipalities could also be observed: "Why should not we also participate in power?" The municipalities, however, are not simple entities: in them we recognize the divisions, the manufacturing companies, business units, services, condos, families. Is there any reason why the logic of federalism should not be applied to these realities? Why they could not legitimately ask for the right to autonomy and self? And so, following this path, a waterfall, you come to the individual. Why deny the individual the right to stand as the smallest and most important center of political power?
In my opinion, the only credible federalism is that it is willing to conduct its own principles to the extreme limits, the one that is not content to stop, as did Proudhon, the head of the family, who is also a limit to be considered brave, but should be up to the individual. The federal ideal is that, consistent with its underlying principles, is willing to distribute power to all citizens under equal conditions, namely the individualistic federalism, which is based on the unconditional and indiscriminate promotion of the individual, recognition certain fundamental individual rights (equal opportunities, equal access and unlimited to all kinds of information, right to participate in the preparation of the agenda) and the representation with a binding mandate. So, to be consistent with its principles, federalism can not be limited to the group, but must extend the rights of which he promoted to the fullest extent. But at this point, what would be federalism if not a DD?
The fact is that, in practice it looks good from extending the logic of federalism to the individuals and, usually, we stop at the regions, although we can not exclude the possibility of including the provinces and even municipalities, but no one thinks we can go further. In so doing, federalism ends up multiplying institutions with political power, since the central power must be added the local authorities. In any case, ordinary citizens remain excluded from political participation and the company is still kind of dual class with a dominant minority and the majority of citizens subject, whose only power conferred is to freely elect their representatives.

17.12. A system for the rich?
Who wins in such a polity? Certainly the men who have aspirations of power: a federal system, it can accommodate a larger number than any other form of government. Of course, the lords of Rome should share power with those of the periphery, but at least their position would be more stable. Overall, the power will be more extended and leveled, but also more secure, and because of the conditions of peace guaranteed by the federal as well as the most formidable competitors, having their share of power, have little motivation to stir things up. If anything, one would expect some reshuffling, some exchange of roles, but the ruling class would still be firmly in command. In addition to the men of power, earning with federalism will be the richest in resources, which may have the upper hand in competition with other centers less fortunate, and become richer. Not for nothing is the federalism advocated mainly by the regions and the more affluent middle-class people with ambition for power. For the same reason, federalism goes very well with capitalism thrives and where they are common values \u200b\u200bof free markets, free trade, of free competition, free enterprise, traditional values \u200b\u200bof capitalism where the rich are getting richer and the poor get poorer.
And the citizens? For them, change very little. The power will never be in their hands. They will continue to elect their representatives by delegation apparently subject to verification, but in fact white, and their votes will be contested at the sound of advertising and propaganda campaigns by those who hold economic power and controls the means of information mass. Many people probably understand the subtle play of which they are victims and they will retire from politics. So to govern the country will remain only those who have large private interests to defend, which will be supported by the masses of unsuspecting citizens to be just a tool. In practice, the country was ruled by powerful groups, companies, corporations and lobbies.
Even if it were to be granted citizens the right to take any decision through the referendum vote, in fact, as long as the power in the hands of the representatives, they find thousands of tricks to prevent the will of the people prevail. Thus, the government of this country is the prerogative of citizens from the middle class up, which will govern their own benefit, with the result that a broad band population must deal daily with problems of mere survival, in typical capitalism: the rich are getting richer, the poor get poorer.
the light of what has been said, we can distinguish two forms of federalism. The first, which we call "individualistic" or DD wants all citizens are sovereign, all participate equally in political power, we all have equal opportunities, equal access to information, control of the agenda, and representation is only mandate. It is considered utopian and, therefore, is not being achieved. The second, which we call 'public' or DR, is the only existing form of federalism, and that we refer to it when not otherwise specified. Well what are the pros and cons of federalism DR?

17.13. Pros and Cons of Federalism
A major advantage of the f. is to avoid the dangers of nationalism. "The federalists are distinguished from all other political movements, whether democratic or undemocratic in this: they regard as an enemy to kill the very thing that everyone else considered, each in its own way, like an idol to worship or serve: the nation state "(in POZZOLI 1997: 287). "Understood correctly, the federalism opposed to the centralized nation-state and reified, that is the main product of the modern era of nationalism "(Elazar 1998: 105). It is precisely this aspect of the f. which is based on an attempt to create a united Europe. "The novelty of the experiment is the search for European Federation of institutional response to the crisis of sovereign " (LEVI 1998: 379).
Another important advantage of the f. is linked to the principle that unity is strength. " "All the people who have incurred great wars have been caused, albeit unintentionally, to increase the strength of the government, those who could not do it, have been won" (Tocqueville 1996: 164-5). The Federation, however, makes it the strongest single state, without which it increases its armament. According
J. Maritain, the f. "Seems the only way open for the abolition of war" (message delivered to the radio in New York on 25/3/1944 (in POZZOLI 1997: 107). In fact, only a f. worldwide could achieve this ambitious goal, which is particularly attractive in an age like ours, in which weapons are more frightening, they cost more expensive, the risk of conflict than in the past. Well, today, f. a world of peoples, which is not a simple confederation of sovereign states as the League of Nations or the UN could actually achieve cessation of war between sovereign states and to ensure a lasting world peace.
But the benefits do not stop there, and because their discussion would require too much space, I will only mention the following: •
Sovereignty "group" substituted for "State".
• Many "groups" involved in power (polyarchy).
• It achieves an excellent compromise between the need to preserve the advantages of a large state and the need for individual groups to protect their identity.
• It expands the middle class, made up of owners and wealthy citizens, who care about education, autonomy and participation in power.
• It encourages the journey towards democracy extended to a large number of citizens.
• There is interest in keeping the peace terms.
• It gives impetus to free enterprise and free competition, with consequent economic growth of the country.
• Capitalism and market economy are the ideal conditions to thrive.
Among the disadvantages of f. I remember the following: •
Federalism responds to a logic of power, the power of the rich.
• There is little interest in the promotion of the individual, but we pursue the logic of the group. • The right to
will of the people you precede the raison d'etat.
• The individual is reduced to the role of the instrument, subject to simple consumer and producer of votes.
• In accordance with the principle of majority (if that means 51% of eligible voters) will precede that of the stability of the government. Example: If you go to vote 30% of the electorate, decide what becomes law, the majority of this 30%. Federalism does not care what he thinks the 70% who do not go to vote, but only that there is a law.
• Since, typically, they go to vote for those who have interests to defend, you end up with a dictatorship advent of the middle class, which we call polyarchy or oligarchy enlarged, but not democracy.
• Wealth is not distributed according to individual merits, but will continue to exist a differentiation of social status by birth. • The Federalist
peace is not averse to war, but love the status quo by the rich, who, unlike the poor, have no interest in changing the system.

Grumbacher Copal Medium Thinned With Oms

16. Corporatism

Theory aimed to organize the community according to interest groups that compose it, the so-called corporations, which play an intermediate role between citizens and state. The corporate society is founded "on families, businesses, the professions, the parties, organizations on spiritual, moral and cultural "(RASI 1973: 182). Unlike the capitalist countries, where the different subjects of interest contribute voluntarily and freely, the corporate society is rigidly centralized and controlled by the state.
The ultimate expression of the historic c. is the medieval society, which is based on the autonomy of the semi-sovereign categories, transferred by a family of professional and social relationship of a hierarchical, where there are no class conflicts. The ideal corporate
enhances the tradition and the authority to set up and what has been stated also in the fascist regimes, and was accepted by the church, which supported him in the social encyclicals.

16.1 Advantages and limitations
The advantages and limitations of the c. are the same centralized states, where the prevailing logic of the group, while the freedom of the person appear more or less sacrificed.

Pokemon Card Double Star

15. Anarcho-capitalism

union of capitalism with anarchism stems a particular political movement, called Anarcho-capitalism, the exponent of which is considered more representative Murray Rothbard.

15.1. First of all the individual
the middle of Rothbard's libertarian thought is individualistic conception that sees in every man a being of will, desires, ideals and projects, but also the intelligence to achieve its goals, which are partly innate and learned a greater extent and ordered hierarchically according to the value attributed to them by the subject. In this respect, it should be understood that each one is master of himself.

15.2. Private ownership
But how effectively the individual to give satisfaction to his wishes? To answer this question Rothbard uses the figure of Robinson Crusoe, that of a single human inhabitant of an island. Having no competitors, Crusoe is, in theory, the undisputed master of the island and everything it contains. However, in fact he has only that "uses and transforms." The same case, according to Rothbard, if your character landing on an island already inhabited. Also in this case, "his real property - real control over its physical assets - in effect extends only to those products through his work" (ROTHBARD 2000: 66).
result that can be considered the fundamental law of libertarian thought: "Everyone has an absolute right to control and ownership of his own body and natural resources that he finds and transforms unused" (ROTHBARD 2000: 106). Anyone who violates this law is a criminal. This is the meaning Private Property Rothbard seconds. Everyone owns something (of their bodies, their possessions, their ideas, their own reputation) and is free to use it to the wants, and no one is given to interfere in the sphere of private property of the individual, even the state.

15.3. The State
If we go back over its history, we find that the state "originated by means of a process of violence, conquest and exploitation" (ROTHBARD 2000: 362) and violation of individual rights. It follows that the state is a negative entity that has no right to enter into the private lives of citizens, to demand their consent election and impose taxes. The citizen who votes for duty is like the soldier who is forced to participate in the battle with the only choice between killing or being killed. Even if the soldier is working to exterminate the enemy, it does not mean that he has freely chosen to join the battle. Similarly, even the citizen's vote is intended to be a free act, and therefore it is not able to legitimize the state to interfere with anyone's private property and to impose a tax burden.
Rothbard defines the state as a criminal organization that obtains the revenue (taxation) by means of physical coercion and a monopoly of violence. "The State, Therefore, it is coercive criminal organization that feeds through a system of taxation-theft on a large scale and gets away with organizing the support of the majority [...] making sure the alliance of a group of intellectuals capable of shaping opinion popular rewarded with the crumbs of his power and the vile metal "(ROTHBARD 2000: 277). According to Rothbard, in a truly free society the state should not exist.

15.4. Advantages and limitations
Asking from the perspective of the person can be considered a good thing.
other hand, excluded from the political status could be a serious mistake, because it does not take into account the unfortunate people who, in the absence of an adequate supply of social solidarity, could not complete his life's project.

Ideas For Resident Advisors At College

14. Capitalism

Capitalism is a complex economic and financial system that now dominates the world. Being able to exercise a decisive influence on the politics and lifestyles of people, it is almost impossible to remain indifferent to it. And indeed, today the people of Earth can be divided into two parts, depending on how you relate with c.

14.1. Definition and generalities
c. The term was never used by Marx, but was introduced by Werner Sombart in 1902 with his opera The modern capitalism, to indicate a production system dominated "by the principle of profit and economic rationalism" (Sombart 1967: 165).
"Capitalism differs fundamentally from the traditional-feudal economic system in which the same people are employed at the same time possessing the means of production" (Luttwak, Creperie Verratti 1996: 29). L ' is a craftsman who works independently and has his workshop and his tools and uses his head and his hands to look for work, produce and sell. The capitalist instead owns the means of production and rely on other manual execution of tasks. "Unlike the then craftsmanship, capitalism distinguishes the work from the executive directors "(Luttwak, Creperie Verratti 1996: 39).
When it comes to c. you must think about many things (private ownership of means of production was minimal, city, currency, middle class, business class, wage labor market, free competition, profit) and is therefore not surprising that it is not easy to define it in a nutshell.
"For capitalism - writes H. Kelsen - we want an economic system characterized by private ownership of means of production, free enterprise and competition: an economic system, therefore, assumes that economic freedom, the absence direct interference by the government in economic life "(1995: 335).
"The capitalist society rejects anything that can not be used for profit" (SCHIAVONE Creagh in 1997: 221) and rejects everything that does not fall under a cold rational calculation of utility. "Capitalism leads to the production as an end in itself also leads to the consumption end in itself" (Bookchin 1995: 116).
The capitalist ethic is an ethic of the market, the main guiding principles are the production and consumption, and whose ultimate aim is the maximum profit in the shortest possible time. The c. is based on freedom of initiative and want the State minimize interference in the affairs of citizens, because it believes that the free market is not only able to organize themselves, spontaneously, but is also capable of producing a steady growth of the company. "" May all that is not expressly prohibited, "is the motto of modern commercial law" (Luttwak, Creperie Verratti 1996: 30). "It's never happened before that the company has given almost entirely to the market to determine their values \u200b\u200band behavior patterns" (THUROW 1997: 90).
"Economic freedom is an essential requisite for political freedom" (Friedman 1981: 8). Starting from this indispensable condition, the c. builds its own political system, which moves in a bourgeois perspective revolves around the principles of production and profit. "The capitalist society rejects anything that can not be used for profit" (Greagh 1997: 221).

14.2. Capitalism and Democracy c. The
is an economic system that can be created in different political systems, whether democratic or autocratic type. The fact is that all contemporary democracies are capitalist. It should be noted however that it is invariably of DR systems and that there is no example of cohabitation of c. and DD. This is not to say that the c. is incompatible with the DD. But I think that DD could tolerate one type of c. very different from what we know, a c. it is no longer based on relations director / performer or entrepreneur / employee, but on responsible participation of all, each according to their capabilities and skills, no longer on commercial advertising and consumerism, but information and knowledge. DR
The fact that the political system seems to be the most convenient and functional for the capitalist economy does not mean that the c. is democratic. For a capitalist ideal is that the government is able to guarantee the safety conditions, domestic and international, such that each farmer, financier or speculator can freely pursue their economic ventures and make profits without limits, and safely. The question who should rule? "Declares the capitalist indifferent to the 'who', provided that such a weak government in relation to operators and strong in respect of trade unions and all those movements that restrict the freedom of the market or attempt to private property.
Based on these conditions, no one can understand why the capitalist system can be truly democratic. "The capitalist democracy allows freedom of speech, of association, including elections, until no of these freedoms is likely to threaten capitalism, not just the threat becomes serious, the full force of law will be put into action to suppress the threat "(LASK 1976: 222).

14.3. Capitalism and State
"The market, and only the market is king" (THUROW 1997: 3). But it is not. "If left to themselves, instead of moving towards a balance, financial markets may go to extremes and eventually collapse" (Soros 2002: 105). The presence and intervention of the State must therefore be regarded as fundamental. This is what teaches us the experience of recent decades, the market left to itself is unstable and dangerous, generates wealth, but also profound economic and financial crises, the latest of which is underway as I write.
A capitalism without rules ( deregulation) is growing out consumption to exceed production capacity in the country and require the implementation of a policy indebtedness. This is what happened in the U.S. and goes well with the overwhelming tendency of China to conquer new markets. "Americans consume more than they produce, allowing the Chinese to produce more than they consume (Ruffolo, 2008: 231). C. If the
could do without the state shall be very glad if so, eventually the free market remains sovereign. But the c. needs of the state and, in practice, there is no c. pure state, as there is a totally free market, and entirely free from political influence. Thus, from many quarters and now we are inclined to assume that, by itself, the c. not be able to "run out the full range of human motivations and aspirations" and that it needs to be corrected in some way political intervention of the state (see Turner 2002: 414-9). "The liberal capitalism can be a beneficial force for prosperity, political freedom and the prospects for peace, but only if accompanied by concrete political actions and policies that voters and leaders are free to adopt or reject. Among the policies to be chosen are those specifically targeted to reduce the insecurity and inequality that capitalism itself creates doubt "(Turner 2002: 436).

14.4. The two models of capitalism
According to M. Albert, we can distinguish two main types of c., the Anglo-American and European, who, after the fall of communism, vie for the domination of the planet. The first gives priority to financial companies, stock markets and speculation, which, as owners invisible, affecting businesses, as without the direct involvement and responsible participation in the production process. The money is to decide, the lots of companies, which are considered the same way as any commodity, and stands as an end rather than as mere means. Speculators are not concerned, nor the quality of the product or the fortunes of the company, but only to its own benefit, which must be fast. The state must allow free enterprise, low taxes imposed to speculators who enrich themselves without work and save money on social spending.
The European model is based rather directly on the company and its production process. The company plays an important role in society and belongs to the stable shareholders, who are interested in its production, and can not be sold as a commodity ". Money is a means and the target profit is not necessarily quick, but in the long term. The state is called upon to act according to social needs and to impose a tax burden proportionate to income. This is known as "capitalism with a human face" (MALLE 1998: 36), which is particularly represented by the Swedish model.
However, in a capitalist society, power is in the hands of the rich. The rich man owns farms, where thousands of citizens, which gives it the power to blackmail politicians and direct their choices, is the owner of publishing houses and newspapers, television networks and Internet portals, through which it controls information ; is the owner of money, with which it can also affect the justice (we all know that often the causes are won not by who is right, but who can afford the best lawyers). Only
religious power could effectively oppose the capitalist plutocracy putting ethical values \u200b\u200bof the individual (or person) to those of money but, more often than not, the churches appear sensitive to their material interests and, at least de facto, uphold the values \u200b\u200bof capitalism. So the logic plutocratic dominating the world.

14.5. History
During the Mesolithic and Neolithic period until the beginning of the relationship between families and clans were settled between and marked by the exchange of gifts, whose purpose was twofold: to ensure good neighborly relations and implement a form, however crude, of redistribution of resources (Ruffolo 2008: 6-7). Not only prehistoric humans, but also ignore the old idea of \u200b\u200bc., mainly because they tend to believe that every resource of land is owned by a god or his representative and behave accordingly. The first signs of
c. appear together with the incipient spread of agriculture and war, the introduction of private property, slave labor, business and entrepreneurship, even if they are still lacking the typical features of C, namely the collection with a view a profit and an economy independent from the company.
Thus, ancient Egypt is considered the property of Pharaoh, which provides its officials to allocate a plot of land for each family group, which is then distributed to cultivate, taking for himself the part of the harvest necessary for subsistence and pouring the rest in the warehouse of the owner, or the Pharaoh himself. Not very different is the situation in small and large empires of Mesopotamia, which should be born by the actions of military conquest. In this case, the victorious generals occupy the land and divide the families of the warriors who care for them: the owners are the conquerors, they are in the will of god and will remain so until they have enough strength to defend themselves from other potential suitors. In practice there are two types of properties: that a group with wins and retains his own powers, for example, the territory of a clan or tribe, and that which is received by the king after a victorious military campaign, albeit with a commitment to pay a tribute to the king.
The aristocratic class is content with owning slaves and land, and does not think to reinvest profits or to enter into a free market competition, which will downgrade the level of industry, commerce and parvenu. Hence the low reputation of which they are facts people enriched by his own work, whatever it is. In fact, in ancient greek-roman world and for much of the Middle Ages, businesses do not have much social credit and are sometimes openly despised.
This state of affairs continued until the establishment of the Maritime Republics, whose economy is largely tied to commercial traffic of all kinds. The big merchants are starting to build their fortified luxury residences around the episcopal churches, attracting a swarm of small artisans and traders. That's how you go up the first urban areas, called villages, which are soon surrounded by walls. Start the rise of the bourgeoisie. Venice, Pisa, Genoa and Amalfi became the new Athens, with their fleets, that are rampant in the Mediterranean and look to the East, with their rowers-citizens, their political power and the same rivalry towards other republics and other cities that are springing up in the meantime.
After the discovery of the capitalist center of gravity shifts to other European countries such as Portugal, Spain, Holland and England, whose fleets through the waters of the oceans and bring their men in every corner of the planet , thus laying the foundations for the industrial revolution and by registering, between the eighteenth and nineteenth century, an irresistible rise of capitalism, which reaches its climax in the next century, the so-called American century. After
fall of communism, capitalism remains the only viable force in the field and dominates the global economy, nor can be glimpsed alternative, or so they say. "It is unlikely that, in democratic countries, capitalism and market economy will be replaced by something else [...]. There is no alternative in view that it can be shown more than the prevailing market economy (DAHL 2000: 175-181). The
c., which had previously benefited from those we know as the "first", "second" and "third" industrial revolution, continues to draw a tremendous support from so-called 'fourth industrial revolution', that has characterized the last decades, to this day, and that was put into effect by the diffusion of information and globalization, which would permit a significant acceleration of structural changes of the market economy, has meant that people began to talk of "turbo-capitalism . "Capitalism is now called" turbo-capitalism "today because the structural changes are strongly accelerated by the spread of information technology and globalization" (Luttwak, Creperie Verratti 1996: 5).
Today China is a country with strong economic growth, is also the first creditor nation in the U.S., and many already see in it G1 in the future. The twenty-first century could well be Chinese, but anyone will, it seems that you are likely to exceed the limits of sustainability of capitalist growth, which are related in part to the finiteness of resources and the ability to release and disposal of waste, in part the problems associated with social inequalities, the growing demand for access to the wealth of the masses excluded (Ruffolo, 2008: 260). So in the end, the c. threatens to bury himself. Or manage to survive, but only if it can find a viable response to the above limits. In any case, it will have to play his game with himself. According to Giorgio Ruffolo, real alternative to c. if they have not glimpsed the only possible option, as well all'autoannientamento, remains to make changes and corrections to the present system (2008: 261-79).

14.6. The Bourgeoisie Bourgeoisie
The term we refer to a particular social group, which revived in Europe in the early second millennium AD, eventually characterize modern society and contemporary art. Initially, the bourgeois are those who live in town (the village), as opposed to the nobles who live in the countryside. It is only since the French Revolution, which joins the bourgeoisie, as a positive alternative, the aristocracy. For the first time you start to believe that not only the birth or blood, but they also deserve the 'best': the merits underlying the career and wealth. That's how the rich are beginning to flank on the rich to birth, ie the nobles. In the nineteenth century the middle class is well defined and consolidated. It indicates that segment of the population that is committed to make money, that the Anglo-Saxons call middle class, which is set against the peasantry, which produces goods supplies.

14.7. The liberal capitalism
The bourgeoisie has created the liberal capitalism which now dominates the planet and has to deal only with himself. Compared to the old-feudal economic system, the c. has few similarities and many differences. Among the similarities, we must remember the use of force. Even liberal states they originate from acts of conquest, and must defend itself with force. But the differences are clearly prevalent. Only the richest countries in fact have such sophisticated weapons of war do not fear attacks by foreign enemies, as well as a police system that fairly protect people from the risk of criminal activity. A sound insurance system, then, while ensuring fair compensation to those who have suffered loss, not only as a result of actions by third parties, but also because of natural events. A number of economic enterprises and productive employ masses of employees, workers and salaried workers. The fee shall be ordered to compensate citizens for any wrongs and protect their belongings. But that's just what he wants to appear: the reality, as we shall see, is another.

14.8. A dual society
Today in capitalist countries, it is possible that one person holds those assets or those means of production (land, industries, services, workshops, commercial and financial) that previously could only belong to a community, and may have an economic asset that would be enough to safeguard livelihoods to millions of people. In a capitalist country no one asks if luck is the result of the great entrepreneur of personal merit or fraud, deceit, robbery or exploitation, just as no one asks whether the poor should be provided to his personal limitations or external causes. In a capitalist country to anyone interested in the principles of justice: it is facts and facts say that those who have more money is better and who is poor is an incompetent.
Consequently, the rich are denied rights granted to the poor, how to exercise the economic power to make the ascent to political power, have greater access to information sources and the media, to afford the best financial advisers, the best legal assistance and health care, and many other things that are normally closed to the poor. Although seemingly the law is equal for all, it is clear that the rich can avail of the law to their advantage more than I can do to the poor, and be stronger right to defend its interests and its properties.
The owners of the means of production usually rely on other manual execution of tasks and often live in rent and without the need to carry out any work. The difference with the old-feudal system was clear: the owner then had to personally contribute to the good performance of its business, now may be limited to reap the rewards, as does, for example, the shareholder who does not even know the actual production of in which he is part owner; then the craftsman had to use their heads and their hands to look for work, produce and sell, now can program the contractor desk tasks to be assigned to individual employees. The result is a distinction, unreported but in fact, between citizens and citizens of Series A Series B

14.9. The state minimum
Once the protection of the law, the capitalist hopes to be left free to take any initiative in the belief that his business skills, his flair and his genius can open new markets, create new jobs , increase the average well-being and usefulness, and claims this is when the maximum freedom the individual and the minimum state interference. A few laws have been minimal, and all aimed at ensuring the safety of citizens, respect for their commercial contracts and protection of their private property. Not only was it not restrict the race to the enrichment of some citizens, but should also help, such as not having a progressive tax burden, in the belief that the rich make progress and to advance the world. Better yet, for the capitalist, is a single world state or a world commonwealth of states, always the 'floor', living in peace and where everything that is not expressly prohibited by law is to be understood as lawful.

14.10. Globalization
is in this context that develops the culture of so-called globalization. Looking at the world as a village, the great entrepreneurs identify the places where labor is cheaper there and they produce their goods for resale where there are people willing to pay more. "The capitalists get rich by moving services, goods and natural resources where they cost less to where they are more expensive, and moving the production of goods where it is more expensive, less where it is" (THUROW 1997: 181). We are facing a new phenomenon. "For the first time in human history, any product can now be produced and sold everywhere. In a capitalist economy, this means that each commodity and all production activities will be carried out where costs are lower, while the final product or service can be sold where prices and profits are higher. Minimize costs and maximize revenue here, in substance, the maximization of profit, which is the core of capitalism "(THUROW 1997: 124).

14.11. Free competition
In words also accepts the capitalist free competition, to guarantee that this will help select the best people and products, which are of benefit to the consumer. In fact he is willing to abide by the rules only when competition is stronger than others and can crush them, but the fear in all other cases. So when there are more firms that are potential, producing the same product, fearing damage and competing, they tend to create trust or signs, or conditions of monopoly or oligopoly, that eventually favor the capitalist and harm the consumer . In practice, it is rare that a country fully implements the capitalist free competition, would rather the spirit of free trade.

14.12. The figure of the consumer
In "free" market move two key figures, which are each mirror the other. Of the first we discussed: it is the entrepreneur or financier. The second figure is that of the consumer.
In theory, the c. that the consumer wants to be left free to do as it sees its purchases. In fact, however, even this freedom is respected and in fact the consumer is constantly bombarded by messages of any kind, that give it direction in certain directions, then, are most welcome entrepreneurs and politicians. Today, in a capitalist country, eg. in Italy, you can expect a large extent what a baby will do during his life, based only on his family and the place in which it resides. For example, a child is born Udine, it is expected that he will be baptized, who attend the school, which will seek to enter the world of work activities by choosing the less risky and more profitable, to buy a certain kind of products according to its availability and economic according to the advertising pressures, which will marry and will give birth to one or two children, the nurture of such projects to get them higher than he has been able to come, that will do anything to give others the best image themselves in the belief that this will help you make money, which will exhibit the signs of his wealth as evidence of its quality and that also will take care to build a tomb that is appropriate to its status, even after death, others know that he was a great man.
capitalist society does not care about the real needs of the individual, but only of production and consumption, depending on profits. So many needs are created by the business community, who, having to sell their products, investing money to send to the people of enticing consumers to induce them to buy advertising. And even when the consumer has bought, the message continues to reach it without stopping, the snare, the circuit, seduces him, and finally induced him to make new purchases, which are often useless. Buy today and tomorrow with pay installments and without interest. Tenders and loosening of the market appear so persuasive as to induce the consumer to commit even money that he hopes to win tomorrow and take a risk that might cost them much more expensive than you might imagine.
The consumer who purchases on installment must be secure at least maintain the current revenue, but woe if something unexpected occurs, a disgrace, an urgent new spending. In this case he will have to borrow and to pay for it, should tighten their belts and still hope that in future, the business should be even better. But this is not obvious: the farmer has to work when it suits them, and when a worker does not make or the product does not roll, there is the risk of redundancy, and more years pass, the more difficult to find a new job. Under these conditions (buy in installments and not having job security), it is well understood that it is extremely difficult for an average consumer in a capitalist society can never be peaceful and happy.

14.13. The market needs above all
not only induced needs, but also the simplest, such as education and health, should be subject to the logic of free market and profit. Apparently there is freedom of education and care, but only apparently. Take the schools. The publishers propose texts that comply with ministerial directives, but they are often not designed with the ability to learn and the real interests of an average guy, which should be to learn to understand the natural environment, economic and political surroundings, so that we can live responsibilities as an adult. For their part, teachers are so burdened by the need to comply with the programs and to carry out bureaucratic not find a suitable space for a personal relationship and an elastic interpretation of the educational and training activities. So often the school is on the edge of the concrete problems and everyday life and does not meet the real needs of future citizens, namely students, or gratifying the professional qualities of teachers.
There is no method of assessment of teachers' work than the usual market law, which states that most students enroll in a class, the teacher is more good, for whatever reasons that may have led the student and his parents prefer that class. The same can be said for health care. There's no way, as it were "scientific," to evaluate the performance of a doctor. What counts is the number of customers that that doctor is able to conquer, not the actual goodness of his care, the number of its performances, not their quality. This is the reason that in a capitalist society it makes little distinction between the provision of such "scientific" and a kind of "magic". In the end, only the satisfaction of the customer and the business that is determined, and so a seller of illusions, that manages to earn one million euro per year, is worth far more than any of the professionals, who earn one hundred thousand. Similar considerations can be made for any other economic and productive. The television program is the best one that suits audience, the book, magazine, car, freelance, entrepreneur, politician, much as they can apply to sell and sell. The c. assess the quality through the quantity. C. The
poses no moral problems and considers everything that produces a good profit. There is a 'capitalist ethic , unless you want to consider that the so-called Weber's Protestant ethic of memory, which sees the success and wealth in a tangible sign of divine approval and the election to eternal life ( WEBER, 1996: 213-4). In the capitalist logic, there is nothing forbidden. Even "the crime is simply an economic activity among others, that happens to have a high price (the prison) if it is taken" (THUROW 1997: 172). The c. aims to meet every possible interest, such as noble as the most perverse and leaves individuals free to decide what is good in itself: "the choice of being a criminal is legitimate as that of becoming a priest" (THUROW 1997: 302). Mafia-type activities, the support and exploitation of prostitution, pornography, trafficking in arms, trade in human organs, drug-dealing, theft, robbery, kidnapping of people, corruption, extortion, scams of all kinds, and every other possible action, which is repugnant to common ethical sense, this is evaluated by the c. depending on the volume of money that circulates. Without a code of ethics, capitalist societies they live completely embedded in the present, interested in immediate profit, and disregard of possible consequences, such as pollution and environmental degradation, leaving a legacy to future generations.
for C. in the first place is the market and profit "Gold opens all roads. The gold open all the roads became the God of the nation. There is only one vice, poverty. There is only one virtue, wealth. You have to be rich or despised. If it is indeed rich, it shows their wealth in every means imaginable. If you are not rich, you want to be in every way imaginable. Nothing is dishonest "(Diderot 1967: 263). Giving space to the market, because it generates wealth and contributes to social progress and welfare of the people.
The same technological progress and industrial property is allowed only to the extent that it is able to offer new products to market or to exploit new markets. From this process of monetization
general do not save even the ancestral family institution. Also, in fact, is under the scrutiny of a cold financial assessment, which states, for example, that children are no longer an advantage for parents, but only a burden. "From the standpoint of economic analysis, children are a luxury commodity whose price is rising fast (THUROW 1997: 35). According to this assessment, there would be no advantage to having children, and so, even the most natural processes, the generative process, is reduced to pure calculation.

14.14. The future of capitalism
The future of the c. depends on its intrinsic limits and the answers that you will find the following questions. Is it really possible an unlimited development for all people? It has the land resources necessary to do so? Can capitalism worldwide, or we must resign ourselves to a world of duality? How will the Third and Fourth World, poor, against the First and Second World, the rich? Consumerism is an end in itself compatible with the capabilities the planet to dispose of waste products? Capitalism can create happiness? If the c. were set as the new system will be able to collect the inheritance? Until now a consensus answer to this question was not found. If
Marx branded capitalism and has advocates the end, Darwin, without knowing it, has formulated a theory that, in a sense, it can strengthen it. The theory of natural selection, in fact, shows: first, that all living things are competing with each other and only the fittest survive, and secondly, that man is descended from simpler forms of animal and represents the last step of ' evolution. Based on these conditions, social Darwinism can be said that even in human societies go on the most capable. Meanwhile, back in vogue the Renaissance idea that the fate of each depends on themselves, by their own will, by its own merits. Well, social Darwinism and individualism help explain and justify the capitalist competition and bring back the distinction between rich and poor to a simple biological fact. Now the quality of an individual can be measured with the heritage or it is considered appropriate to set limits to the richness of a person: the more one is rich and he is worth.
Today there are those who tend to see in the c. the highest possible expression of the experience policy, a level of development is not exceeded, the terminus of human history (Fukuyama 1996). According to Joseph Johnson, in spite of everything, "capitalism will be with us again for a very long time for the simple reason that has proven to work" (2009: 156). But there are some who believe that the c. must end. According to Severino, for example, capitalism, sooner or later, "must realize that by destroying the earth destroys itself. It is this consciousness, not the moral or religious conscience, to push capitalism to fall "(1993: 56). "Capitalism sets, because they are forced, by becoming aware of their self-destructive character ... The enemy most ruthless and most dangerous of capitalism is capitalism itself "(Severino 1993: 56-7). "The" dilemma "of capitalism is to destroy or 'really' the Earth, thus destroying himself, or be convinced of the destructive nature of his act, assume to the salvation of the Earth and not profit, in this second case destroying itself "(Severino 1993: 84).

14.15. Advantages and limitations of computerized automation
new industrial chains now makes possible mass production of consumer goods widely available at the popular level.
have improved the living conditions of families, which can rely on services such as electricity, telephone, running water, heating and so on, and improved, in general, the standard of living. According
estimators of c., even the dizzying income differences between entrepreneurs and wage earners are advantageous. It's good, in fact, that the entrepreneur is willing to assume all risks of the company, while the employee is properly paid from the safety of receiving a steady salary, however things go. "Clearly, there are advantages in a system that allows people to shift to other risks not want to run and allows them to be paid a fixed sum, whatever the outcome risky process. There are great advantages in allowing the opportunity for a similar specialization in accepting risks, these opportunities lead to the typical range of capitalist institutions "(Nozick 2000: 268).
Obviously not feel the same way the detractors of c., which put emphasis on the following questions. C. The
is an ideological system founded on the logic of competition: they all compete against all the strongest wins. This explains the impressive military equipment, along with the technological divide, geopolitics draw a two-speed, dominated by a few rich and powerful countries, foremost among them the U.S., which dictates its own law on the rest the world, is a law of war, exploitation, robbery, neo-colonialism, neo-imperialism (AA.VV. 2003). When
takes a worker, the capitalist entrepreneur has to "see this taking a chance of gain" (COLE 1976: 182) and must disregard all other ethical considerations, human and environmental. The c. does not pursue the principles of equality of birth and opportunity, or deals with individuals in the same way, but tolerates discrimination on grounds of wealth. So is inherently unfair.
While the capitalist society promotes the well-being, on the other hand, it creates an army of losers: all who, for one reason or another, can not adapt and compete. The spirit of capitalism is that it does not ask "the problem of meeting global needs" (Acquaviva 1994: 53). The capitalist does not care that the company is plagued by the scourge of unemployment or poverty and discrimination. "The fact that capitalism can not provide social security, is - writes Cole - the very best argument I know against the preservation of the capitalist system" (1976: 188). C. The
puts the money and ethics, without a code of ethics, capitalist societies they live completely embedded in the present, interested in immediate profit.
In the globalized capitalist world is that the rich "have most of the vices of the aristocracy without having the virtues" (Let 1995: 43). "I am happy to pay for private schools and high level for a private police, private systems for the collection of garbage, but managed to escape, to a large extent, the obligation to contribute to public finances" ( LET 1995: 45). In practice, they are willing to pay for private services and tend to avoid paying taxes, think about their interests and close in a dull selfishness. And so do the rich do not: each seeks the maximum profit for himself and is indifferent to the others. Selfishness dominates and the loneliness is increasing. C. The
generates glaring social inequalities, unequal distribution of resources. "What makes capitalism is great, but you can not be happy with the fact that the only incentive capable of so much variety and production efficiency also determine people's living conditions and unlikely to recur serious inequalities, inequalities which, in turn, then ask for a security policy "(Nagel 1998: 118).
the unequal distribution of wealth is accompanied by the unequal distribution of rights, so that the rich also exercises political power, while he who is marginalized by private property, so is the participation policy. In fact, "it is unlikely that economically unequal citizens are politically equal" (DAHL 2000: 167). Thus, large population groups are excluded from the democratic process and generate dual society.
Given these improvements, however, industries, chemicals, car exhaust, plastics and waste cause pollution of air, water and food, with negative consequences for health. In addition, the overexploitation of resources may determine alteration of the ecosystem, capable of fear of negative consequences, and only partly predictable about the future of our planet.
Then there is the capitalist's profit can be realized only on the condition of increasing demand and consumption for its own sake. No account is taken of the exhaustion of resources, pollution and environmental degradation, health risks and the legacy that we leave to future generations.

Unblock Dvd Sony Sr200p

13. Liberalism

Although the spirit of liberal states in the seventeenth century., The term "liberalism" is unknown to the great liberal thinkers until the eighteenth century, and entered for the first time in the political language only in 1812, and then spread rapidly in the West, taking on different connotations in different countries.
There is no definition unambiguous term "liberalism" and "Even today the word liberal has different meanings for different nations" (Matteucci 1983: 593).
The only common element is the defense to the various conceptions of the sphere of autonomy of the individual from the intrusiveness of the institutions and the state. Fukuyama called "liberal democracy that recognizes the" right to free economic activity and economic exchange based on private ownership and the market "(1996: 65), in other words, capitalist democracy. According Viroli, "the individualistic liberalism is a political theory that says the principal end of the political community protection life, liberty and property of the individual "(Virola 1999: 44).
The idea of \u200b\u200bthe state as an instrument of the city is ancient. Indeed, Cicero wrote: "Above all to ensure the security of private property were established cities and states. It is true that men united in society to the natural impulse, but it is also true that they, in the safety of the city, sought the protection and care of their property "(De officiis II, 21). However, it is only a couple of centuries that this idea has taken on the dignity of a real political doctrine. The l. spread in Europe in the period from the Reformation to the French Revolution, having its main expression in natural law, in contractualism, in some of the principles established themselves at the time of the Glorious Revolution, such as habeas corpus (to safeguard against arbitrary detention) and the parliamentary system, in the Declaration of Independence (1776) and the Declaration of Rights ( 1789 and 1793).
Liberals support the existence of universal human rights, inalienable, and prior to every society, the so-called inherent rights, before which even the greatest kings must bow, and they see a product in the state of man and an instrument in the hands of citizens, whose function is to act as guarantor of those rights. According to the liberal view, the state is a necessary evil and must be minimized through the creation of a political system which combines the freedom of man with the slightest interference by the government.
Among the liberal thinkers, which include Montesquieu, Smith, Burke, Kant (XVIII century), Lord Acton, Ricardo, Say, Malthus, Constant, (XVIII-XIX century), Comte, Tocqueville and JS Mill (XIX century) Hayek, Popper, Nozick, Fukuyama, Leoni, Einaudi (XX century), prevailing in the individual and unlimited confidence in the free market. In the microeconomic field, the l. argues that "the individual is the best and only judge of its special interest and that the company has the right to regulate its actions only when feels wronged by him, or when he needs his help "(Tocqueville, Democracy in America, I, 5). In terms of macroeconomics, however, that the famous Say's Law, which states that supply and demand balance always automatically. [Malthus is one of the few who do not share that optimism and to draw attention to the risk that the population growth is not automatically accompanied by an equally rapid increase in resources.]

13.1. Liberalism
According to HJ Laski, liberalism expresses the view of a new social class, the bourgeoisie. The middle-class citizen (who can read and write, who knows the history and traditions, the foundations of legal and administrative nature and philosophy, science and techniques, oratory and political) and develops a new consciousness will no longer be driven from outside and from above. Presuming to know their interests and, believing that they have the means to satisfy them, he refuses to be led by the hand like a child by a paternalistic state, and aims to be an adult, free, independent and master of its own destiny. Strong both in knowledge (culture, information and expertise are increasingly controlled by this new class, which includes writers, free thinkers and practitioners) and in the money (increasing amount of money circulating through the work and initiatives of the middle class, which, therefore, assumes an increasingly important role in many sectors of society that were previously the preserve of the nobility), the middle class first confronted with the old masters, the nobility and the clergy, and then they displaces.
liberalism is tied to an individualistic conception of society, for which "the man as a rational being is a person, and has an absolute value, before and independently of the relations of interaction with his fellows" (BEDESCHI 1996: 261). Humboldt and Constant believe that the real protagonist of civilization and progress of both the individual and not the State. Assuming that everything is relative and questionable and there is no absolute good and objective, Kelsen says that each is the best judge of what is good for him and not given to anyone to impose their point of view. Of course, since everyone makes mistakes, it's best to get back to the will of most. However, even if a value was expressed by the majority, it is still a relative and disputable, and can not be imposed on anyone. For Green, it is worth anything is to realize the greatest extent possible, the faculty proper to man, all that promotes the human person and makes what should be, like God is good and private property would be Hopefully, everyone was owners.
For liberals, every community is the person who forges, and determine the decisions and preferences about what makes a life worth living, all actions are intentional and meaningful, and only these conditions, they can be understood ; the rules of conduct and ethical values \u200b\u200bbelong solely to the private sphere and should not be a topic of discussion, much less public scrutiny. The hero of the liberal society is the individual who aspires to be left free from any interference of the state, free to pursue their interests and to follow their impulses, even selfish, thinking that by doing so, the market is lively circulates more money and increase welfare for all. The liberals are fighting for the freedom of (religion, speech, press, assembly, association, economic initiative, participation in political power) and freedom from (from want, fear, ignorance), in conviction that freedom of individual initiative is good and desirable. In this respect, liberalism and DD are: for both the starting point is the individual link on the individual and both independent and responsible. This is exactly the opposite of what they say el'organicismo communitarianism.
Bruno Leoni, who, along with Einaudi, is one of most prestigious exponents of contemporary Italian liberalism, shake the principles of liberalism in opposition to socialism. According to him, socialism is directed, gray, boring and negative in the rise in weakest segments of the population feelings of envy towards the upper classes, then the envious promises a comfortable life regardless of their merits. In contrast, the liberal freedom is chaotic, yes, but productive and stimulating, like the crowd: the crowd is also chaotic, but everyone knows where it goes and what he wants. The social order is like a military parade: in it everyone has to go where they ordered to go (RICOSSA, Preface to LEONI 1997: pp. 7-20).

13.2. From the "first man" to liberal democracy: the thought of Fukuyama
appeal to authority of Hobbes and Hegel, Francis Fukuyama speaks of the "first man" or the state of human nature and argues that, unlike animals, this 'man could sense a desire for glory ( thymos ), which led him to show courage and to risk their lives (Fukuyama speaks of megalotimia ) while in captivity the recognition of others (1996: 164ss). But not everyone felt the need, indeed, most men were content to be recognized as equal ( isotimia ). According to Fukuyama, all that is good in its history has been created by men who wished to be better recognized (1996: 318), which, rightly, have become masters of the world. For Fukuyama, liberal democracy (DL) is the best possible form of government: "Today we can hardly imagine a better world than ours, or a future that is not essentially democratic and capitalist" (1996: 67). In short, we came to an end and we can enact the "end of history" (1996: 9).

13.3. Liberalism and democracy
liberalism "during these two centuries, it is not state and is not synonymous with democracy "(PONT 2005: 110), it is not an egalitarian doctrine. In liberal thought, "Freedom and equality are antithetical values, in the sense that one can not fully implement one without the other severely curtailed" (BEDESCHI 1996: 273). The l. disagrees with Rousseau, who argues that nature has made men equal and civil society makes them unequal, while agreeing with Nietzsche, according to which men are by nature unequal, while the company, with its moral of the flock, they makes it equal.
egalitarian doctrines require that everyone has enough and no one has too much and, therefore, tend to set the minimum amounts and maximum income. Liberalism, however, sees social life as a great competition, where it won the most capable and where those who have more is better. Thus, poverty becomes a vice and the poor are citizens of Serie B. The only two equalities are allowed from liberalism to put together all the competitors in the same starting conditions and that all should be equal before the law. But both are illusory. In fact, the first is just a theoretical statement and is used as an excuse to justify the inequalities of arrival and the second is belied by the fact that, even today, the rights of citizens are largely conditioned by the creation and budget.
Online Overall, the liberalism is in favor of separation of powers, the constitution and federalism, but not necessarily democracy. A Liberal government, in fact, can also be a constitutional monarchy or parliamentary, or an oligarchy or aristocracy, provided that it respects the freedom of individuals. The only conceivable form of democracy, liberalism and representative, which must be practiced with respect for minority rights and avoiding degenerate into a tyranny of the majority, and no matter that the suffrage is universal suffrage would be fine too restricted type of census.
DD and liberalism must instead be considered as incompatible because they support two different conceptions of the individual. In fact, while the individual liberal compete in a world full of traps and sees the State as a necessary evil to protect his rights, the democratic individual is an active and responsible part of the free association that is the people and sees in the State an irreplaceable and valuable ally. Furthermore, liberalism tolerates inequality of people at birth, DD no.

13.4. The state minimum according to Robert Nozick
The starting point of Nozick is by individuals, all of which are all unique and different "in temperament, interests, intellectual ability, aspirations, natural inclination, spiritual pursuits and way of life who wish to lead "(Nozick 2000: 315). According to the scholar, "There are only individuals, different individuals with different individual lives. Using one of these individuals for the benefit of others, uses him and is beneficial to other [...]. Use a person in this way reflects neither takes sufficient account of the fact that this is a separate person, that his is the only life he has to live "(2000: 54).
Nozick's liberalism is strictly individualistic in the sense that conceives the individual as an absolute point of origin and the end of all social facts. The collective are just sums of individuals. The state is a derivative of individuals and its role is only instrumental and service the diverse needs of individuals. Now, one state is good or bad depending on who you judge. It follows that there can be an ideal society for all, "we drop the false assumption that there is only one kind of better society for all" (Nozick 2000: 323). Eventually, the state is best which intervenes as little as possible in the lives of citizens. In short, power to the state minimum, maximum individual freedom. The theory of the state minimum is dictated by an optimistic view of the individual, that, for Nozick, is first "person, a being capable of self-management and to give full meaning to their lives. Well, as a person, every individual is equal to each other.
For Nozick, the State must be a sort of 'night watchman', which should interfere as little as possible with the life plans of individuals and limited to ensuring their safety. "Our main conclusions on the state - Nozick writes - is that a minimal state, limited strictly to the functions of protection against violence, theft and fraud, protection of contracts and so on. Is justified, that any kind of been longer ends with the violate the rights of individuals not be forced to do certain things, and it is unjustified and that the state minimum desirable than that right "(2000: 17). "The state minimum - continues our - we as individuals are inviolable, that the other is not allowed to use in certain ways as a means or tools or instruments or resources, treat us as people with individual rights with the dignity this entails. Treated with consideration, respect our rights, we can, individually or with whom we want to choose our life and to realize our aspirations and the conception of ourselves as much as we can, with the help of the voluntary cooperation of other individuals with the same dignity "(2000: 337).
must add that, like Locke, also the individual Nozick is an individual-owner. Well, the state must have at least one task: to ensure citizens' rights, foremost among them the property. Nozick is contrary to the welfare state and to every form of legal equality, including equality of opportunity.

13.5. Advantages and limitations
In general, the main advantage of liberal thought is to have made possible the proclamation of the inalienable human rights, of which there is no evidence in our Constitutions and Declarations of democracy. If anything, you can complain about the discrepancy between what is proclaimed in words and the reality that unfolds before you eyes. In Basically, the liberal principles remain largely unnoticed. In particular, no company is practiced equality of opportunity for the citizens, while there are still prejudices and differences by birth. It continues to flaunt the principle of meritocracy, but then not explain why it should be meritorious born into a family rather than another, in a country rather than another. The people on the scene, as a unitary body, only when he went to the polls, and then practically disappears. Expressed his 'general will', it disappears and in its place are the elected representatives who exercise, they alone, the political power.
Beyond of purely ideological principles, liberalism asserts in defense of private property of the bourgeois class, which is elevated in natural human right, as he begins to give the State the role of policeman, which ensures that this right is not violated. This can be seen as beneficial by the bourgeois class, but not from the working class and salaried workers.
In this respect, the l. has been criticized inside and outside. Among the first, stands the criticism that he had "conceived the right to private property as the right to Excellence" (BEDESCHI 1996: 267). According to Constant, for example, private property is not a law of nature "because without the combination that gives a guarantee that it would not be the first occupant of the law, in other words, the law of force, that is a right that is not such "(BEDESCHI 1996: 268). Also according to JS Mill, the land is "the original heritage of the whole human species" and no one can claim exclusive rights over it. Private property can be justified only in relation to work: I can say 'this land is mine' and only to the extent that the cultivation and making use of my arms and I take care of my brain. In reality, however, the l. allows the existence of property and income from work independently and, therefore, deemed lawful a person can be rich without working.
The main criticism coming from external social-communist and the Roman Church (see individual entries).