O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida;

Meu Twitter: https://twitter.com/PauloAlmeida53

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paulobooks

sábado, 10 de agosto de 2013

Clausewitz no Afeganistao: o buraco sempre fica mais embaixo... - John Thornhill meets Emile Simpson (Financial Times)

Lunch with the FT: Emile Simpson

Over Dorset crab and Picpoul, the former soldier hailed as a Clausewitz for our times talks to John Thornhill about military strategy, Afghanistan and ‘armed politics’
Emile Simpson©Patrick Morgan
When the veteran military historian Professor Michael Howard raves about a book by a little-known, 30-year-old ex-Gurkha officer and declares it to be comparable to Clausewitz, it is surely worth snapping to attention. And after reading War From the Ground Up, I am all the more intrigued to meet its author, Emile Simpson. Drawing on his experience of fighting in Afghanistan, Simpson has written an engrossing account of the 12-year conflict that challenges the way we think about war and suggests how we might better fight the next one. “War From the Ground Up is a work of such importance that it should be compulsory reading at every level in the military,” Howard concluded in his Times Literary Supplement review.
Sitting in the Drapers Arms on a gloriously sunny day in north London, Simpson looks every inch the military man, from his regulation haircut to his civilian uniform of brown sports jacket and green tie. As he rises to greet me, the tall, athletic Simpson exudes an air of orderliness. His voice, modulated by his schooling in Cambridge and the parade grounds of Sandhurst, is one notch too loud, as is often the way with army officers.
We decide to move to the garden of the Islington gastropub, which he says is one of his favourite watering holes. It is eerily deserted on a Friday lunchtime. As we settle at a shady table, I ask Simpson whether he is from a military family and what first drew him to the army. He explains that his parents are both Cambridge academics who were somewhat surprised by his choice of career. “My interest in things military was part through history and [part] a spirit of adventure,” he says, in the slightly elliptical manner he deploys when talking about himself.
On a gap year spent teaching in Nepal, he was drawn to the local culture and traditions of the Gurkha regiment. After studying history at Jesus College, Oxford, where he was tutored and inspired by Niall Ferguson, he went to Sandhurst, where he was commissioned as an officer in the Royal Gurkha Rifles. In his six and a half years in the army, Simpson served three tours in southern Afghanistan, first as a platoon commander in charge of 30 men in Kandahar in 2007, then as a military intelligence officer helping to fight the counterinsurgency in Helmand province in 2010, and, finally, working at headquarters of the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) under the US commander General John R Allen in 2011. Like Carl von Clausewitz, whose service in the Prussian army during the Napoleonic wars shaped his classic book On War , Simpson’s writings are informed by deep personal experience as well as a fascination with military theory.
Before we can plunge too deeply into Afghanistan, the waitress arrives to take our order from the surprisingly ambitious menu. Simpson goes for steak tartare and Dorset crab. I opt for the smoked mackerel and am also tempted by the crab. We order two glasses of Picpoul.
Simpson says that what intrigued him as a frontline officer was how much his experience on the ground diverged from what he had been taught about war and the way politicians talked about the conflict. Clausewitz still largely defines how most people understand war: it is primarily seen as an interstate activity that is polarised, decisive and finite. One side wins, declares victory and imposes its terms – and narrative – upon the loser. The other side accepts defeat, licks its wounds and works out how to fight smarter next time.

More

LUNCH WITH THE FT

But the Afghanistan conflict, which has lasted longer than the two world wars combined, does not neatly conform to this pattern. Who is the enemy? How do you know when you have won? What would victory even look like? At times, when Simpson was fighting in Helmand at the height of the counterinsurgency, the battle lines were fairly clear. “We were fighting the Taliban pretty much every day. There were a lot of casualties – both ways. The battle group as a whole [of 1,000] had about 110 wounded and 28 dead, both British and Afghans,” he says.
At other times, it became near-impossible to distinguish between enemies and friends. The conflict appeared kaleidoscopic, indecisive and seemingly infinite. In his book, which interweaves military theory with personal anecdote, Simpson cites the example of one local commander who was notionally on the side of the Afghan government in Kabul but “rented” out some of his forces to the local Taliban because they had agreed to pay for them. In such situations, trying to divide the population between “them” and “us” was not only dangerous but counter-productive. “There were not two sides. Everyone was on their own side,” he says.
What frustrated Simpson was that abstract doctrinal concepts kept obstructing sensible operational judgments. “The metrics of success were based on red and blue and geographical control of an area – blue being our own forces and red the enemy,” he says. By 2010 his unit had developed its own alternative metrics “identifying different constituencies in the area you were operating in, be they violently or politically hostile to you, sympathetic or undecided.
“From that understanding, you could use both military means and non-military means, working with our civilian counterparts, to deliver a narrative, or a political story, if you like – just like a politician might deliver a narrative during an election. You give each constituency what it wants while going on the offensive against the opposition’s narrative.”
Simpson is as passionate in talking about army doctrine as he is dispassionate in talking about his own personal experiences. But he uses a very different vocabulary from the normal terms of military discourse – “persuasion”, “opponents” and “strategic audiences” in place of “force”, “enemies” and “targets” – and draws inspiration from sources as varied as Aristotle’s teachings on rhetoric and medieval theologians. As he expounds his theory of “armed politics” with eloquence, I am struck by his more than fleeting resemblance to a young David Cameron.
Our starters arrive and Simpson laughs at my mackerel, an upturned tail of a fish pointing up to the cloudless sky. He tucks into his steak tartare and launches into an explanation of how the relationship between soldiers and politicians must change if we want to fight 21st-century conflicts more effectively.
Simpson says that the accepted model for civil-military relations remains Samuel P Huntington’s classic book The Soldier and The State, first published in 1957. That book’s main reference point was the showdown between President Harry Truman and General Douglas MacArthur during the Korean war when the over-mighty general threatened to unleash nuclear war on China. Huntington argued that generals should never again be allowed to have that level of strategic authority, and that policy guidelines should be set by the president. There was also the longstanding constitutional argument that soldiers should not interfere in setting policy because that was the preserve of elected politicians. While that policy may have made sense during the cold war, it does not convince Simpson today. “What I am saying now is that the constitutional argument still makes sense but the strategic argument doesn’t. What you have now is the politicisation of military action down to a tactical level.”
As Simpson puts it, strategy is always “the dialogue between desire and possibility”. Politicians may desire an outcome but their strategy has to be tempered by the operational realities on the ground. In conflicts such as Afghanistan, those frontline soldiers responsible for implementing armed politics on the ground must have more say in shaping and presenting that strategic narrative. “Huntington’s one-way flow simply does not make sense if you want a nuanced political approach down to the tactical level,” he says.
The crabs arrive accompanied by an array of crushing and gouging instruments that would not have disgraced a medieval dungeon. And, however splendid the crab looks and tastes, I quickly realise it was the daftest main course I could have ordered. Extracting meat from a crustacean’s extremities is not compatible with taking shorthand notes. While we’ve been talking, the pub garden has slowly filled up with fashionable young mothers and prams. The badlands of Afghanistan could not seem further away. I ask him what he thinks will happen when Nato forces pull out next year.
As he rips a claw off his crab, Simpson says he doesn’t foresee a dramatic collapse of the Kabul regime. The government’s endemic corruption poses a bigger threat to its survival than the Taliban does, he argues. When Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989 they left behind a reasonably stable regime that was still able to defeat the Mujahideen when they massed for a conventional battle at Jalalabad later that year. It was the implosion of the Soviet Union in 1991 that doomed the Najibullah regime by cutting off its funding. The regime in Kabul today may not be very democratic or effective, he says, but it is unlikely to be overthrown by force.
“The Taliban can take dusty villages but for them to present an existential threat to the state means they have to knock out the Afghan army backed by US air power. They did not do it with the Russians. They will not do it today. If the state fails, it will be because it implodes as a result of corruption,” he says. As fragments of dismembered crab are cleared away from the table (and my notebook), Simpson orders a lemon tart and I plump for a poached pear. I am keen to prolong the conversation and explore one of the other big ideas of his book: the fact that social media has had a transformational effect on war.
Unsurprisingly, we return to Clausewitz, who is still taught in military academies today. Simpson rejects any suggestion that his work is comparable. “That would be incredibly immodest and inappropriate,” he says. “But my book is an interpretation of Clausewitz in the modern day ... [On War] is characterised by dialectics, between theory and experience, between history and the present day, between intuition and doctrine ... It is very much located in reality, but not consumed by it. I very much identified with that experience.”
As a young soldier in the Prussian army, Clausewitz fought at a time when the whole conception of conflict was being revolutionised. In the late 18th century, war was not unlimited: the great powers would try to defeat the enemy on the battlefield to gain an advantage but they rarely knocked out other states. Following the French Revolution, Napoleon was able to mobilise millions of soldiers and overthrow other regimes. “The whole state was at risk. It was a fundamentally different concept,” Simpson says.
He argues that a similarly decisive change in conflict is taking place today. Thanks to videos taken on smartphones and the universality of social media, the “strategic audiences” in any war are global. As we are seeing in Syria, images of conflict can be flashed around the world in a heartbeat. “Can we get back to a situation where there is a clear divide between military and political activity? I don’t think we can. Any war is going to be contaminated by contact with audiences around the world who have an interest in that conflict,” he says.
That has two big consequences. First, there needs to be a fusion of military and political activity at the operational level. But, second, conflicts have to be dealt with on their own terms and compartmentalised to prevent their proliferation, as the French have successfully done in Mali. “How you can box in a conflict will be the number one strategic question that will govern the next few decades,” he says.
In Simpson’s view, one of the biggest mistakes the US has made has been to talk about a “global war on terror”, a phrase he describes as silly because it raises expectations that can never be met. “If you elevate this to a global concept, to the level of grand strategy, that is profoundly dangerous,” he says. “If you want stability in the world you have to have clear strategic boundaries that seek to compartmentalise conflicts, and not aggregate them. The reason is that if you don’t box in your conflicts with clear strategic boundaries, chronological, conceptual, geographical, legal, then you experience a proliferation of violence.”
Simpson finished his last tour of Afghanistan just before Christmas 2011 and left the army shortly afterwards because it “was mainly incompatible with personal life, my girlfriend and my family”. He also had broader frustrations with the career structure in the army. “If you are a reformist and want to reform the army then you have to bide your time, as you do in any organisation. Just being in a bureaucracy in general was quite frustrating,” he says.
Simpson has switched careers and is now studying international law, a field in which he hopes he can combine both theory and practice. But he will not be wholly lost to the field of military doctrine as he is already working on another book about the concept of the enemy. His spirit of adventure is sated by trekking trips in Nepal and cycling tours in Oman.
Since his book’s publication in 2012, Simpson has been invited to speak to several military audiences in the US, where the debate still rages about how best to conduct counterinsurgency campaigns. It has received a cooler response from Britain’s top brass, despite Professor Howard’s endorsement, but Simpson says the army is slowly becoming more receptive to fresh thinking because of its recent setbacks in Basra and Helmand.
“Thirty years ago, if you could drink a bottle of whisky in the evening and run 10 miles in the morning and had a big moustache, then you were a good bloke and didn’t need to read anything. But today the army is much more open to reading. The army has got less afraid of intellectualism since things went wrong in Iraq and Afghanistan,” he says. “We do need to rethink our profession.”
John Thornhill is the FT’s deputy editor
-------------------------------------------
Drapers Arms
44 Barnsbury Street, London
2 glasses Picpoul £11.50
1 steak tartare £7.50
1 smoked mackerel £6.50
2 Dorset crab £27.00
1 chips £3.50
1 potatoes £3.50
1 lemon tart £6.50
1 poached pear £6.50
Total £72.50
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2013. You may share using our article tools.
Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

Paraguai, a Alianca do Pacifico e o Mercosul - Rogério Mendelski

O VELHO PARAGUAI DE GUERRA
Postado por Rogério Mendelski em 28 de julho de 2013

O Paraguai deu uma banana das grandes para o Mercosul e hoje é integrante da Aliança do Pacífico, um novo bloco econômico formado pelo Chile, Peru, Colômbia e México e que já controla quase 50% do comércio exterior da América Latina, movimentando em apenas um ano de existência 556 bilhões de dólares em exportações e 551 bilhões de dólares em importações.

O ingresso do Paraguai na AP não foi fácil por que o Brasil tentou prejudicá-lo, não satisfeito com a suspensão daquele país do Mercosul, depois que Fernando Lugo foi cassado pelo Congresso paraguaio. Diplomatas do Paraguai e da Colômbia informaram ao diário ABC Color, de Assunção, que o Brasil quis impedir a entrada dos nossos vizinhos alegando as “cláusulas democráticas” do Mercosul como se este bloco tivesse alguma influência sobe a AP.

As tais “cláusulas democráticas” foram motivo de discretas chacotas entre a diplomacia dos países que saudaram o Paraguai pela decisão tomada. “Os membros da Aliança do Pacífico estão muito contentes e agradecidos pela disposição do Paraguai em fazer parte desse foro”, disse o chanceler mexicano José Antonio Meade.

Mas o que é mesmo esse bloco econômico que com um ano de funcionamento tem 210 milhões de habitantes e representa um terço do PIB da América Latina e se coloca como a oitava economia do planeta?
A resposta é bem simples: Chile, Peru, Colômbia e México – e agora o Paraguai – se uniram em torno de objetivos democráticos e capitalistas na definição do presidente chileno Sebastián Piñera: “O compromisso da Aliança é o de compartilhar valores comuns como a democracia, o respeito aos direitos humanos, a liberdade econômica privada, o direito à propriedade produtiva, intelectual e empresarial, assim como a economia de mercado e a liberdade de expressão”.

Pensando bem, são valores ausentes em alguns paises do Mercosul e, por isso mesmo, o Paraguai não reclamou de sua saída do bloco que ajudou a fundar em 1991. E não quer voltar por que já disse que não senta na mesma mesa onde estiver a Venezuela. Este é o velho Paraguai de guerra cujo povo sabe muito bem o que é ditadura, democracia e farsas como a que Fernando Lugo tentou implantar no país.

AS TENTATIVAS

Em 2005, na Cúpula das Américas, em Mar del Plata (Argentina) os países que hoje integram a AP tentaram estabelecer tratados de livre comercio entre os paises da América Latina, mas Hugo Chavez influenciou os membros do Mercosul e apoiado por Nestor Kirchner a idéia não prosperou. Era o momento de alguns paises democráticos como o Chile, Colômbia e México começarem a pensar num novo bloco econômico.

BONS NEGÓCIOS

Os países integrantes da AP já eliminaram as tarifas de importação e exportação em 90 por cento de seus produtos para o incremento do livre comércio entre si. Quando negociam em bloco olham para a Ásia e buscam atrair investimentos que irão beneficia-los também em bloco.

APOIO DO SENADOR

O senador Álvaro Dias (PSDB-PR) saudou a posição do Paraguai. Diz ele: “Quando ocorreu o impeachment de Fernando Lugo e o Mercosul decidiu pelo seu afastamento, abrindo a porta para o ingresso da Venezuela, imaginou-se que o Paraguai teria poucas alternativas. Hoje, o Paraguai está na Aliança para o Pacífico e agora pode dar uma banana para aqueles que o expulsaram do Mercosul”.

ACORDOS ECONÔMICOS

O que para Hugo Chavez e Nestor Kirchner tinha cheiro de enxofre – acordos com os EUA – para a Aliança do Pacífico é puro perfume de progresso e bons negócios.
Quem estabelece acordos comerciais com os EUA precisa cumprir altos níveis de exigência e complexidade, mas depois de estabelecidos nada mais muda. Ao final das negociações, o país se torna apto para firmar qualquer acordo comercial no mundo. A opinião é do diplomata Rubens Ricupero, ex-embaixador do Brasil nos EUA e ex-secretário-geral da Conferência nas Nações Unidas sobre Comércio e Desenvolvimento.

FRACASSO

Enquanto o Mercosul patina e não sai do lugar desde 1991, a Aliança do Pacífico atrai investimentos e negocia com todos os países oferecendo vantagens aduaneiras e taxas atraentes.
No ano passado o Chile cresceu 5,5 % e recebeu 30 bilhões de dólares em investimentos externos. O México firmou 13 acordos comerciais na mesma linha, o Peru 12 e a Colômbia 11.

No Brasil, caminhões com gêneros perecíveis ficam dias parados em Uruguaiana esperando pela boa vontade da burocracia argentina. E vice-versa.

Crises financeiras: que tal revisar sua historia? - Book review

Crises financeiras sempre vão existir, pelo menos enquanto investidores e apostadores empurrarem os limites de risco de suas aplicações para ganhar sempre um pouco mais. Não depende só de banqueiros gananciosos, ou de autoridades reguladoras "liberais" ao extremo, pois os fatores estão incorporados ao "DNA financeiro" das pessoas: sempre tentar ganhar um pouco mais.
Nesse contexto, os banqueiros sempre são tentados a emprestar um pouco mais. Mas isso não ocorre só com os "especuladores de Wall Street". Na base da mais recente crise financeira americana não estavam apenas os derivativos financeiros criados pelos banqueiros privados de Wall Street, mas também as hipotecas imobiliárias garantidas em excesso do seu capital pelas seguradoras oficiais do governo americano, Fannie Mae e Freddy Mac, que empurraram como nunca os limites políticos dos empréstimos a pessoas que, normalmente, nunca teriam condições de receber aqueles créditos, pois apresentavam um risco potencial, muito grande, de inadimplência. Foram essas hipotecas subprime que foram transformadas em derivativos negociados no mercado com base na classificação AAA que receberam das agências de classificação de risco, já que as garantias eram dadas por agências governamentais, que não iriam falhar, certo? Pois falharam.
Assim são as coisas, mas é sempre bom aprender com os fracassos.
E quais foram os fracassos do sistema financeiro? Emprestar demais, ou seja, criar dinheiro, uma coisa que os governos estão sempre fazendo. Governos vão à falência? Aparentemente não, mas quando não podem mais emitir dinheiro, como os da Grécia e Portugal, para eles a festa acaba mais cedo...
Governos deveriam ter as mãos atadas na emissão de dinheiro, inclusive na garantia de empréstimos hipotecários para pessoas com alto potencial de risco.
Como está fazendo agora o governo brasileiro, por exemplo, não só com o programa Minha Casa, Minha Vida.
Vai dar em bolha e explodir, ou implodir?
Eu não sei, só sei que a conta vai ficar para nós, nossos filhos e netos.
Disso eu tenho plena certeza.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

----- EH.NET BOOK REVIEW ------
Title: History and Financial Crises: Lessons from the 20th Century
Published by EH.Net (August 2013)

Christopher Kobrak and Mira Wilkins, editors, 
History and Financial Crises: Lessons from the 20th Century.  
New York: Routledge, 2013. x + 138 pp. $140 (cloth), ISBN: 978-0-415-62297-4.

Reviewed for EH.Net by Jon Moen, Department of Economics, University of Mississippi.

This book is a collection of six papers that were originally published as a special issue of Business History (Volume 53, Issue 2, April 2011).  It includes a new summary chapter on the use of history in understanding modern financial crises.  Two themes tied the original collection together: the roles of globalization and regulation in financial crises.  Because of the five papers chosen, the collection focuses on the 1920s and 30s.  The papers cover the experiences of the German, Swedish, British, Canadian, and U.S. financial and banking sectors just before and during the Great Depression.  Individually, the five papers draw useful lessons from historical episodes of financial crises, and I enjoyed reading them.  Because they were subject to careful peer-review, I will not review them individually.  Instead, I will review the effectiveness of the collection as a whole.
The original introductory essay and the new concluding essay distract from the five papers; they do not clearly make a case for why I should read them as a collection.  The introductory essay by Christopher Kobrak and Mira Wilkins starts with an extended discussion on the definition of a financial crisis.  It acknowledges Charles Kindleberger’s (2011) self-confessed inability to define a crisis and notes attempts to define a crisis on the basis of sudden movements in interest rates or the money supply.  Yet it ends quite unsatisfyingly with “no absolute definition of either financial or economic crisis” (p. 5).  Later the essay apologizes for ultimately choosing a set of papers that are limited to the twentieth century, with an emphasis on the Great Depression (p. 10).  That is not bad, but the apology diminishes what the five essays do offer, as noted carefully in the next few pages.  One important point that the essay points out, however, is that not all crises covered in the special issue resulted in a collapse in demand and prices (p. 15).  Why crises do not inevitably lead to recessions or worse could be examined more.
The new, concluding essay by Christopher Kobrak is problematic.  As a stand-alone essay, I found it to be a potentially compelling survey of the relationship between financial and banking panics and the perils of making casual historical comparisons.  In particular, highlighting the relevance of the banking crises of the early 1930s rather than the spectacular stock market crash of 1929 helps in making historical comparisons with the crisis that started in 2008.  But then the essay veers off into topics that are again distracting, like musing on the loss of governmental discipline from the collapse of the Bretton Woods Agreement (p. 119).  This is odd, as the introductory essay indicates that the paper by Mark Billings and Forrest Capie emphasizes the benefits of flexible exchange rates.  The author then regrets not having an essay or more discussion of the Bank Panic of 1907, stating that it gets “little press in financial histories” (p. 120) and then proceeds to write several pages on the Panic.  I have found quite a bit about 1907 in financial histories by Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz (1963), Gary Gorton (2010), Richard Timberlake (1993), and Elmus Wicker (2000), just to name a few.  I may have contributed something myself.  The section on regulation (p. 123) starts out well, noting how historically regulation has always been trying to play catch-up to financial innovation.  But the subsequent discussion of the breakdown in Bretton Woods again doesn’t seem closely related to the papers of the special issue.  The discussion of “Good Financial Crises” argues that crises that were successfully averted rarely get examined.  Wicker clearly points out that the New York Clearing House successfully dealt with the Panic of 1873, and he refers to the reactions to the Panics of 1884 and 1890 as success stories from the point of view of the Clearing House.  I mention this because there is a lot of historical analysis of specific panics out there that could have been tied into this essay.
The conclusion to the essay left me a bit puzzled.  Certainly financial markets are much more complicated today than, say, in 1907.  But is this the result of an increasing lack of social responsibility on the part of financiers today?  We are asked to compare today’s leaders with those of 1907, who “stepped in to save a system from problems they themselves had created” (p. 131).  Whatever those problems were, I have a hard time imagining that saving his own skin was not first and foremost in J.P. Morgan’s mind, an incentive that just happened to be compatible with that of New York’s financial market in general.  Nevertheless, read the special issue or the book for the all of the essays.  Just do not expect to find a lot of lessons.
References:
Friedman, Milton, and Anna J. Schwartz. A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960. Princeton, NJ: University Press, 1963.
Gorton, Gary.  Slapped by the Invisible Hand: The Panic of 2007.  Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Kindleberger, Charles.  Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises, 6th edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
Timberlake, Richard.  Monetary Policy in the United States: An Intellectual and Institutional History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.
Wicker, Elmus.  Banking Panics of the Gilded Age.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
 
Jon Moen is an Associate Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Mississippi.  He has studied retirement in the United States in addition to his research on the Panic of 1907.  He is currently working on a project with Ellis Tallman of Oberlin College and the Cleveland Federal Reserve Bank on the effectiveness of the New York Clearing House in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.  
   
Copyright (c) 2013 by EH.Net. All rights reserved. This work may be copied for non-profit educational uses if proper credit is given to the author and the list. For other permission, please contact the EH.Net Administrator (administrator@eh.net). Published by EH.Net (August 2013). All EH.Net reviews are archived at http://www.eh.net/BookReview

Geographic Location: Europe, North America
Subject: Financial Markets, Financial Institutions, and Monetary History
Time: 20th Century: Pre WWII

Brics: um artigo antigo, mas ainda valido - Paulo R. Almeida

Encontrado, nesses meandros da internet, que tudo escondem e tudo descobrem: um artigo meu sobre os Brics, originais, ou seja, a quatro, publicado na revista Inteligência:

Rothschilds and Brazil: An Introduction to Sources in The Rothschild Archive - Caroline Shaw (LARR)

RESEARCH REPORTS AND NOTES
ROTHSCHILDS AND BRAZIL: An Introduction to Sources in The Rothschild Archive
Caroline Shaw
The Rothschild Archive, London
Latin American Research Review, Vol. 40, No. 1, February 2005
© 2005 by the University of Texas Press, P.O. Box 7819, Austin, TX 78713-7819

Abstract: N. M. Rothschild & Sons (NMR), the banking house which the Frankfurt-born Nathan Mayer Rothschild (1777–1836) began operating from New Court in London in 1809 and which is continued to this day by his descendants, has a long history of involvement in Brazil. Extensive documentation of this history is preserved in The Rothschild Archive in London, where material up to 1930 is available for consultation. The firm’s initial business with Brazil was in merchant banking activities and bullion dealing, but in 1855 it became the Brazilian government’s financial agent in London and went on to handle the government’s borrowing in the London capital markets and to be closely concerned with the country’s fiscal, commercial, and exchange rate policy. With the bank at the heart of the development of Brazilian public finance, The Rothschild Archive is an important resource for an understanding of this aspect of Brazilian economic and political history, as well as the history of British informal imperialism and emerging patterns of globalization.

Historia empresarial no Brasil: Maua, Roberto Simonsen, Delmiro Gouveia e outros

Trajetória do Barão de Mauá é destaque em curso da FEA sobre Pioneirismo

Cacilda Luna
PioneirismoA trajetória de um dos mais importantes, se não o mais importante empreendedor brasileiro do século 19 - o Barão de Mauá - foi destaque no primeiro dia do curso de Difusão "Pioneirismo no Brasil e a Construção do Século XXI", realizado na Biblioteca Brasiliana Guita e José Mindlin, promovido pela FEAUSP entre os dias 30 e 31 de julho.
Além da exibição do filme "Mauá - O imperador e o Rei" (1999), dirigido por Sérgio Rezende, a diretora do Museu Histórico Nacional (RJ), Dra. Vera Lúcia Bottrel Tostes, enfocou os 200 anos do nascimento de Mauá (1813-1889), um gaúcho que viveu a maior parte de sua vida no Rio de Janeiro e foi responsável por várias iniciativas que contribuíram para o desenvolvimento econômico do país como a construção da primeira ferrovia brasileira, a introdução do telégrafo e da iluminação a gás.
Coordenado pelo Prof. Jacques Marcovitch, o curso faz parte do projeto "Pioneiros & Empreendedores", cujo objetivo é resgatar e difundir a memória dos grandes empreendedores brasileiros. "Temos de lembrar que pioneirismo e utopia se acompanham. A utopia é aquela visão de futuro aparentemente inalcançável e são pioneiros os que ajudam a nos aproximar desses horizontes distantes", ressaltou Marcovitch durante a abertura, que teve a participação do secretário estadual da Cultura, Marcelo Araújo, da diretora do Departamento de Patrimônio Histórico, Nádia Somekh, representando o secretário municipal de Cultura Juca Ferreira, da pró-reitora de Cultura e Extensão da USP, Maria Arminda do Nascimento Arruda, e do chefe do Departamento de Administração da FEA, Adalberto Fischmann, representando o diretor da Faculdade, Reinaldo Guerreiro.
O curso teve início com uma discussão sobre a memória empresarial nas instituições preservacionistas. Em sua exposição, Vera Lúcia Tostes discorreu sobre a vida e as iniciativas empreendedoras de Irineu Evangelista de Souza, o Barão de Mauá, sob um viés museológico. A diretora do Museu Histórico Nacional analisou o fato de a memória empresarial não ter tido o devido espaço e destaque nas instituições preservacionistas brasileiras ao longo do tempo. Segundo ela, os museus do país seguiram por muito tempo o modelo dos museus da Europa, que após a Revolução Francesa passaram a coletar e expor objetos tão somente de personagens ligadas ao círculo de poder da época.
"Logo após a Revolução, os objetos que pertenciam àquela nobreza, especialmente aos governantes da época, foram recolhidos e foram organizados e expostos de maneira a mostrar à população como viviam aquelas pessoas. Era uma mostra didática com um fim eminentemente político", ressalta Vera Lúcia. Mas um lado positivo, segundo ela, é que a partir daí a França decide que aqueles objetos não seriam mais objetos particulares, mas sim pertencentes ao patrimônio nacional, criando-se um sentido de patrimônio nacional.
No caso do Brasil, alguns objetos relacionados ao Barão de Mauá foram preservados devido à sua proximidade com a corte. "Quando esses objetos chegaram aos museus, não havia interesse em valorizar o empreendedorismo ou as iniciativas de um homem que foi tão importante na história brasileira do século 19", destacou Vera Lúcia Tostes. No seu entendimento, a questão de ver o cidadão como empresário é uma visão moderna nos museus, que foi introduzida a partir da década de 80 do século passado.
O Museu Histórico Nacional, de acordo com Vera Lúcia, possui em seus acervos parte dos objetos de uso pessoal do Barão de Mauá, que foram doados por seus descendentes, entre eles uma caixa de charutos, uma escrivaninha e uma cuia de chimarrão. "Temos no Museu alguns objetos de uso pessoal, que chegaram ao Museu mais recentemente, quando se fez uma modernização no enfoque conceitual, histórico, das exposições, ali colocando Mauá como um empreendedor do século 19". 
Mauá e Pedro II: relacionamento difícil
Mas a curiosidade no acervo fica por conta de peças que revelam detalhes da vida do empresário, como seu conturbado relacionamento com o imperador Pedro II. É o caso do carrinho de mão e da pá de prata que foram usados no lançamento da pedra fundamental da estrada de ferro Mauá. "Mauá teve, na melhor das intenções, mais um ato que foi extremamente prejudicial a ele, que foi dar ao imperador o privilégio de jogar a primeira pá de terra naquela pedra fundamental. O imperador entendeu que o ato o diminuía perante a corte ali reunida", ressaltou Tostes. "A partir daí, claramente começou o corte e uma dificuldade muito grande para Mauá continuar com seus empreendimentos, no que dependesse da parte do governo, do imperador Pedro II".
Um objeto importante que ressalta o caráter empreendedor de Mauá e que se encontra no Museu Histórico Nacional é a caixa de madeira contendo cabos de telégrafo, com a qual ele presenteou o imperador. "Uma das iniciativas de Mauá foi trazer os cabos para o telégrafo que uniria o Brasil à Europa. Ele podia ter a intenção de se favorecer, porque dependia de uma comunicação mais rápida e eficiente com a Europa, mas ele estava lançando o Brasil no que tinha de mais moderno em termos de comunicação da época. Ele tinha a visão de que aquilo que serviria a ele serviria ao país", afirmou a diretora do Museu.
"Outro aspecto interessante que você acompanha nesses objetos é que Mauá, apesar de não ter uma formação de engenharia, de tecnologia da época, ele tinha essa curiosidade, se cercando de pessoas que pudessem o orientar de como proceder naquilo", completa Tostes.
O segundo dia do curso "Pioneirismo no Brasil e a Construção do Século XXI" retratou as iniciativas de grandes empreendedores paulistas como Julio Mesquita, Jorge Street, Francesco Matarazzo e Roberto Simonsen. Em 2014, o projeto enfocará os empreendedores da região Norte-Nordeste e, em 2015, do Sul-Sudeste.
02/08/2013

Notícias Relacionadas

Celso Lafer publica livro sobre Norberto Bobbio, o liberal-socialista

É uma honra para a Editora Perspectiva convidá-lo para o lançamento do livro de Celso Lafer: Norberto Bobbio: Trajetória e Obra.


Atenciosamente,
EdPersp [P021]
Av. Brigadeiro Luís Antonio, 3025 - Jd. Paulista - São Paulo - SP - Brasil - CEP- 01401-000  - Fonefax: (11)3885-8388 - www.editoraperspectiva.com.br



cid:image002.jpg@01CE9424.693668B0

Celso Lafer (São Paulo, 1941), professor emérito do Instituto de Relações Internacionais da USP foi, até sua aposentadoria em 2011, professor titular do Departamento de Filosofia e Teoria Geral do Direito da Faculdade de Direito da USP, na qual estudou (1960-1964) e na qual lecionou (desde 1971) Direito Internacional e Filosofia do Direito. Obteve o seu MA (1967) e o seu PhD (1970) em Ciência Política na Universidade de Cornell, EUA, e a livre-docência em Direito Internacional Público (1977) e a titularidade em Filosofia do Direito (1988), ambas na Faculdade de Direito da USP. Com destacada atuação político-diplomática, foi ministro de Estado das Relações Exteriores em duas ocasiões (1992 e 2001-2002) e também ministro do Desenvolvimento, Indústria e Comércio (1999). Atuou como embaixador, chefe da Missão Permanente do Brasil junto às Nações Unidas e à OMC – Organização Mundial do Comércio em Genebra (1995-1998), entidade na qual presidiu o Órgão de Solução de Controvérsias (1996) e seu Conselho Geral (1997). Ainda na OMC, presidiu os painéis: “India: Quantitative Restrictions on Imports of Agricultural, Textiles and Industrial Products” (1998) e “United States: Measures Affecting Imports of Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from China” (2010). É, desde 2007, presidente da Fapesp – Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo. Preside, ainda, o Conselho Deliberativo do Museu Lasar Segall e o Conselho Editorial da revista Política Externa, da qual foi coeditor, com Gilberto Dupas (2000-2008). Doutor honoris causa da Universidade de Buenos Aires (2001), da Universidade Nacional de Córdoba, (2002) e da Universidade Nacional Tres de Febrero (2011), da Argentina, e da Universidade Jean Moulin Lyon 3 (2012), da França. É Honorary Fellow da Universidade Hebraica de Jerusalém (2006). Recebeu o prêmio Moinho Santista da Fundação Bunge na área de Relações Internacionais (2001) e a medalha Armando Salles de Oliveira por serviços prestados à valorização da USP. É membro titular da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (eleito em 2004). Ensaísta consagrado, recebeu o prêmio Jabuti em 1989, por A Reconstrução dos Direitos Humanos (Companhia das Letras, 1988). Pela Perspectiva, publicou, entre outros,Comércio e Relações Exteriores (1977), Ensaios Sobre a Liberdade (1980), O Brasil e a Crise Mundial: Paz, Poder e Política Externa (1984) e A Identidade Internacional do Brasil e a Política Externa Brasileira (2004). Em 21 de julho de 2006, foi eleito o quinto ocupante da cadeira 14 da Academia Brasileira de Letras.

Divida publica: apenas 17 bi; OK, pode-se viver com isso...

... mas não se vc for cidadão de Detroit, caso no qual vc já começa - adulto, velho ou criança -- com uma dívida pessoal de 25 mil dólares.
Aceitável? E se vc não precisa pagar ônibus porque não tem ônibus? Tampouco hospitais, nem policiais nas ruas, nem lâmpadas nos postes, nem postes, por sinal. Aí já começa ficar complicado não é mesmo?
25 anos de social-democracia e de African-americanism resultaram nisso. 
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Is Detroit Dead?
Charlie LeDuff says yes.
9 August 2013
Detroit: An American Autopsy, by Charlie LeDuff (Penguin, 304 pp., $27.95)
“It’s awful here, there is no other way to say it,” Charlie LeDuff writes in Detroit: An American Autopsy. Now that Detroit has filed for municipal bankruptcy, just how awful is a focus of national attention. But not only is Detroit dead, according to LeDuff’s title; the city was “never really that good.” From the moment when Antoine de la Mothe Cadillac—whom LeDuff derides as a “hustler” and “Detroit’s first dope dealer”—established the settlement to the city’s 1863 race riots to the depredations of the modern-day Motor City, LeDuff’s Detroit has been defined by racism, corruption, and greed.
As LeDuff sees it, “Michigan may be geographically one of America’s most northern states, but spiritually, it is one of its most southern”—by which he suggests that it has a long history of racism similar to that of many Southern states. To fit his narrative, LeDuff emphasizes certain episodes in Detroit’s history while wholly overlooking others. For example, discussing the 1943 riots, LeDuff declines to mention that they took place after the federal government designated new public housing, called the Sojourner Truth project, as white public housing (the Federal Housing Administration segregated federal public-housing projects as well as mandating “redlining” lending practices). Mayor Edward Jeffries, a liberal Republican, successfully lobbied Washington to change the project’s racial designation and used a force of 1,100 police officers and 1,600 National Guardsmen to make the project safe for black occupancy. White migrant laborers, many from isolated rural areas, found themselves competing not only for jobs, but also for housing. Resentful of competition, disaffected whites initiated unrest, and the city exploded.
After the riots, Detroit’s politics became more racially polarized, and the divisions worsened through the 1950s, with “white flight” and “blockbusting.” Political realignment, centralized urban planning, the destructive effects of Great Society social programs, and increasing radicalism culminated in even more violent riots in 1967. Coleman Young, a champion of urban race politics, became mayor in 1974. Young once said that “Racism is like high blood pressure—the person who has it doesn’t know he has it until he drops over with a God damned stroke.” Young sought to form ever larger political majorities based on race, and he succeeded. During his 20-year tenure, marked by high crime, middle-class residents fled the city, and Detroit’s population declined by as much as 500,000.
All of this is one part of the record; LeDuff is not terribly interested in the rest. When Michigan became a United States territory, the Northwest Ordinance prohibited slavery there. Antebellum Detroit was a Whig city, a stop on the Underground Railroad to Canada, and the home of abolitionist luminary Zachariah Chandler, mayor from 1851 to 1852 and then senator and secretary of the interior. Yes, Detroit erupted in riot in 1863, but LeDuff omits context, such as the draft, Copperhead politics, and concurrent rioting in New York and other northern cities. After the Civil War, Michigan led the country in civil rights. In 1867, the state prohibited segregation in education; in 1869, it banned discrimination in life insurance; in 1883, it removed interracial marriage barriers; in 1885, it prohibited discrimination in public accommodations; and in 1890, more than half a century before Brown v. Board of Education, the Michigan Supreme Court rejected the “separate but equal” doctrine. That’s a lot of history to overlook.
LeDuff is dismissive of the city’s civic fathers as well. Of Henry Ford, LeDuff says only that he was “a notorious miser and social ascetic” who despised credit. While not without profound flaws, Ford was also a philanthropist and a pioneer of equal opportunity. Ford’s “welfare industrialism” elevated millions of unskilled laborers from subsistence to abundance, and he didn’t discriminate in hiring and promotion. Herbert Northrup, a Wharton School labor specialist, once observed that at the Ford Motor Company in the twenties and thirties, blacks and whites came “closer to job equality” than at any other large firm in the country.
Fully versed in his city’s horrors, LeDuff has little to say about its past glories. By 1950, 1.85 million people called themselves Detroiters, making their city the fifth-largest in America. They sat on the throne of industrial and consumer innovation, and they enjoyed the highest incomes and home-ownership rates in the nation.
Today, of course, it’s a different story. Ruinous political leadership, demographic change, and economic dislocation have bled Detroit of much of its vitality. The city today has just under 700,000 residents. But even now, the population of the Detroit metropolitan area (as opposed to the city proper) is holding steady at 95 percent of its 1970 peak. The Detroit region (again, as opposed to the city) has a median household income of $49,160, ranking 17th in the nation. Media attention often focuses on the decline of automotive manufacturing, but despite the disappearance of high-paying, unskilled jobs, skilled positions remain available. The drumbeat about Detroit’s economic decline can thus be misleading; while the city itself is moribund, the region is not. The “awful” conditions stop abruptly at the city’s political boundaries. Detroit’s problems are as much political as financial.
LeDuff wonders where life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness got lost in Detroit. He is right to wonder, but American Autopsy would be a better book if it did not bury a once-great city.

sexta-feira, 9 de agosto de 2013

Divida publica: 1,000,000,000,000,000; nao que isso impeca de dormir...

Japan’s Debt Looks Like This: 1,000,000,000,000,000 Yen
Japan’s soaring national debt has reached a new milestone, surpassing one quadrillion yen. That’s a one followed by 15 zeros. The mind boggles.
Let the word quadrillion roll around in your brain for a moment or two, because it is not something you hear every day. Quadrillion. 1,000,000,000,000,000. Really.
A paltry million is the numeral one followed by six zeros. A billion? Nine zeros. A trillion is getting up there: 12 zeros. But the mighty quadrillion has 15 of them.
The mind boggles. (Though it doesn’t googol: that one is followed by 100 zeros. And that’s the actual spelling. You can Google it.)
A quadrillion is a million billion, putting it into the kind of language used by middle schoolers to describe really humongous sums, along with gazillion and bazillion.
Measuring any currency in quadrillions brings to mind the hyperinflation of Germany between the wars, or Zimbabwe in the last decade. But a country with a real currency?
It is such a big and unusual word, describing such a big and unusual number, that its use is inconsistent: Bloomberg News used quadrillion in the headline of an early story on Friday about Japan’s debt, but later in the day the stories and headlines referred to a “thousand trillion,” which is not nearly as much fun.
Questions e-mailed to the Bloomberg editors responsible for those stories were not returned, suggesting perhaps a lexicographical quadrilliongate.
How much is a quadrillion? The entire human body is said to have just 100 trillion cells; it takes 10 of us to make a quadrillion. Jeff Bezos has a personal fortune of some $25 billion, allowing him to plunk down $250 million for The Washington Post, which is essentially how much money he might find by looking behind his sofa cushions. To get to a quadrillion dollars, however, we would have to have 40,000 Bezoses, or as many people as live in Prescott, Ariz.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, the astrophysicist and director of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History, helpfully offered a few other ways to think about a quadrillion. “It would take you 31 million years to count to a quadrillion — one number per second, never sleeping,” he said in an e-mail, adding that “a quadrillion yen, stacked in 1,000-yen notes, would ascend 70,000 miles high.”
He also wrote, though it is not clear how he would know such a thing, that “the total number of all sounds and words ever uttered by all humans who have ever lived is about 100 quadrillion.”
“This figure includes all Congressional debates and filibusters,” Mr. Tyson wrote.
Compared with Japan, the United States national debt is a mere $16 trillion or so. But if you convert that number into yen, it comes to about 1.5 quadrillion. So it’s good to have a currency that conserves its zeros. Of course, that also means the total American debt is even larger than Japan’s (though not, it should be noted, as a percentage of gross domestic product).
Hmm. Let’s not talk about that.

Seria desonestidade e ma-fe ou apenas estupidez? Presidente do PT ve protestos capitalistas e da midia golpista

Então ficamos assim: o capitalismo, insidiosamente, perversamente, apenas para prejudicar os companheiros, fica incitando essas manifestações anticapitalistas, para culpar os que são de verdade anticapitalistas, mas que estão objetivamente do lado dos grandes capitalistas, vocês entenderam?
A mídia golpista também adora incitar esses ninjas anti-PIG em protestos contra a mídia golpista para tentar desacreditar os companheiros que têm dezenas de companheiros jornalistas na mídia golpista, as que se sentem prejudicados pela mídia golpista, entenderam?
Não importa: o curioso é que essa matéria sumiu do site da Veja: deve ser mais uma manobra da mídia e dos capitalistas.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida.
Em debate no Rio de Janeiro sobre as manifestações de junho, Rui Falcão acusou também os partidos de oposição pelos problemas que levaram os jovens às ruas

=========

Sobre outro assunto, mas no mesmo universo dos companheiros:

Reinaldo Azevedo, 09/08/2013

O Roda Viva, da TV Cultura, convenham, à sua maneira, prestou relevantes serviços ao esclarecimento do que é realmente o tal “Fora do Eixo”, que comanda a Mídia Ninja. Abaixo, há, um trechinho da entrevista que Rui Falcão, presidente do PT, concedeu ao programa. Percebemos quão verdadeiramente independente é a turma.
No vídeo, Falcão categoriza a rede de bogueiros a serviço do PT, citando seus respectivos nomes. E informa o óbvio: os valentes do “Fora do Eixo” atuaram na campanha eleitoral de Fenando Haddad e são os “companheiros” que, digamos, mais interessam no momento. Vejam o vídeo. Transcrevo a fala em seguida e comento:

“[O PT] não depende só do marqueteiro. Nós temos vários tipos de militantes nas redes sociais. Você tem os grandes blogueiros, você tem aqueles que estão mais estabelecidos como o Nassif, o Paulo Henrique, o Rovai, o do “Vi o Mundo”, né?, o… como é o nome dele, o “Do Vi o Mundo”? O Azenha… Você tem os hackers, que (sic) nós não trabalhamos com eles. Aliás, nós fomos vítimas agora, quando tiraram o site do PT do ar. Então não há controle. Quanto mais espaço, quanto mais liberdade houver, mais eles difundem. E nós estamos tomando contado agora com experiências interessantes, como os jovens que fizeram a campanha de difusão e de mobilização de apoiadores, que é o que mais está me interessando no momento, que é ter militantes que (sic) a gente possa discutir com eles, como é o caso agora desse companheiro da casa Fora de (sic) Eixo, o Pablo Capilé”.
Comento
Trata-se de uma fala de 1min11s, mas muito rica. Em primeiro lugar, destaco o que parece ser uma bobagem porque, a esta altura, todo mundo sabe… o que todo mundo já sabe, mas agora foi oficialmente admitido: o presidente do PT lista os nomes dos que estão a serviço do partido — e que fazem, pois, militância político-partidária, certo?, coisa diferente de jornalismo. Só achei uma pena ele não ter citado os respectivos nomes dos que compõem o primeiro grupo, o dos “grandes blogueiros”.
Essa gente tem todo o direito de fazer militância, note-se. A democracia lhe assegura isso. O que Falcão omite em sua fala é que essa militância é paga, direta ou indiretamente, com dinheiro público: com o patrocínio de estatais e do próprio governo federal. Resta a pergunta óbvia: é lícito o que é de todos — a verba estatal — financiar os que estão a serviço de um partido? De resto, Falcão está sendo incompleto e injusto. Há mais gente recebendo uma bolada — talvez maior do que a destinada aos nomes citados — que não foi mencionada. Em suma, o presidente do PT fez de conta de que a militância não é financiada com o capilé público.
Quanto ao “Fora do Eixo”, eis aí o depoimento que desmente a suposta independência arrotada por Pablo Capilé e Bruno Torturra no próprio Roda Viva. A turma fez a campanha do PT. Fim de papo! E se nota que é uma colaboração profunda mesmo. Hoje, revela Falcão, e a que mais desperta o seu interesse.
Há, note-se, certa indisposição entre os blogueiros a serviço mais antigos, que já podem ser considerados, digamos, “tradicionais”, e essa gente que gosta de falar em “novas mídias”, “novas plataformas”, “tecnologia de mobilização”, misturando, assim, semiótica, informática e mistificação.
Sabem como é… Há muitos brigando pela mesma coisa: grana! Em nome da democracia, é claro!, e contra a “Dona Zelite, a direita, os reacionários…” De uma coisa, no entanto, nenhum deles abre mão: do dinheiro dos desdentados .

PS – Este ainda não é texto prometido no post anterior.

Governo federal desperdica UM MILHAO numa fantasia esquizofrenica...


article image
Obra está abandonada há cerca de três anos (Fonte: Reprodução/Folhapress)

RECURSOS FEDERAIS

‘Museu do ET’ custa mais de R$ 1 milhão e é abandonado

Obra em homenagem ao suposto ET de Varginha, que recebeu investimento do governo federal, está parada desde 2010


fonte | A A A
Uma reportagem do jornal Folha de S.Paulo denuncia o abandono da obra do “Museu do ET”, em Varginha (MG), que teve investimento de mais de R$ 1 milhão em recursos federais.
A obra foi interrompida em 2010. O local é atualmente apenas o esqueleto de uma nave espacial enferrujada, cercada por mato. Uma placa no local afirma: “Aqui tem investimento do governo federal”.
O Ministério do Turismo repassou, em 2007, ao município de Varginha R$ 828,7 mil (R$ 1,1 milhão, em valores atualizados) para a construção do memorial, que deveria contar toda a saga do suposto ET que visita a cidade.
O projeto original previa que a obra deveria estar concluída até dezembro deste ano, mas somente 40% da construção está pronta.
Embora defendam o culto à lenda do ET, moradores de Varginha ouvidos pelo jornal dizem que “já tem coisas demais do ET na cidade” e condenaram o desperdício de dinheiro público.
De acordo com o Ministério do Turismo, a obra consumiu até agora R$ 304 mil. A liberação do restante do dinheiro depende da apresentação de um novo cronograma pela prefeitura de Varginha.
Políticos locais estariam avaliando a construção de um teleférico para ligar o “Museu do ET” à parte baixa da cidade. Nenhuma autoridade foi encontrada pela reportagem para comentar a interrupção da obra do memorial.

Um vandalo academico defende os vandalos das ruas (tipico...)

Não se pode sequer chamar de artigo a peça de lixo acadêmico que vai abaixo, um típico representante de certa mentalidade antimercado e supostamente revolucionária que polui os cursos de humanidades de diversas faculdades brasileiras. Esse é o ambiente confuso, medíocre e vulgar em que estão imersos os estudantes de ciências sociais na grande maioria dos casos no Brasil.

 

O Jurista que Calculava (mas muitos nao calculam) - Gustavo Ribeiro, Ivo T. Gico Jr.