Comercio exterior, noticias ruins em todas as frentes...

Argentina y Brasil aislados en acuerdo contra protecionismo

El Observador (Uruguai), 2/07/2013

Rechazan extender hasta 2016 compromiso del G-20 para de no afectar comercio e inversiones

Brasil y Argentina están aislados en el G-20, grupo de las economías desarrolladas y emergentes, en su rechazo de extender hasta 2016 un compromiso para que los países no adopten medidas que afecten el comercio y las inversiones.

Desde 2008, en cada cumbre de líderes del G-20, el grupo de naciones que representan el 90% de la producción mundial se compromete a rechazar el proteccionismo. Ese pacto se renovó en Los Cabos (México), el año pasado, hasta final de 2014, incluyendo la promesa de retroceder en caso de cualquier nueva medida proteccionista adoptada con anterioridad.

Para la cumbre de septiembre en San Petersburgo, Rusia, en la mesa de negociaciones está la propuesta de extender el compromiso por otros dos años, en medio del reconocimiento de que la economía global no salió de la crisis, continúa debilitada y el comercio internacional se expande lentamente.

El compromiso es importante desde el punto de vista político, a pesar de que siempre fue un fracaso. La Organización Mundial de Comercio (OMC) muestra que en los países del G-20 se implementaron más de cien medidas restrictivas al comercio en los últimos siete meses. Brasil siempre resistió al compromiso de “standstill”, conforme el vocabulario de la OMC. Esta vez la posición brasileño sorprendió a los negociadores al menos por dos razones. Por un lado, Brasil se aísla con Argentina en una situación que se ve como desnecesaria y que alimenta fricciones, cuando el propio ministro de Economía brasileño, Guido Mantega, anunció recientemente que ahora, con el real desvalorizándose, planea reducir algunos aranceles de importación para aliviar el costo de sectores industriales.

Además, el brasileño Roberto Azevedo, nuevo director general de la OMC, deberá ser uno de los mayores defensores del entendimiento anti-proteccionismo. Azevedo participará en San Petersburgo de su primer G-20 con el mismo discurso de cualquier jefe de la OMC, de que el comercio puede ser un motor de crecimiento y una fuente de fuerza para la economía global, y no ser visto como una fuente de inestabilidad y tensión.

============

Argentina cai no ranking de exportadores para o Brasil

Clarín (Argentina), 2/07/2013

Segundo os dados de julho, a Argentina foi superada pela Nigéria entre os principais exportadores para o mercado brasileiro. Agora, a Argentina está no quarto posto. Em julho, o País registrou déficit com o vizinho, apesar das barreiras comerciais que afetam também produtos brasileiros.

O ranking dos principais vendedores para o Brasil agora é assim: China, Estados Unidos, Nigéria e Argentina.

Em julho, enquanto a China e os Estados Unidos exportaram mais de US$ 3 bilhões para o Brasil, a Nigéria marcou US$ 1,8 bilhões e a Argentina quase US$ 1,5 bilhões. 

O aumento da compra de petróleo nigeriano, por parte do Brasil, foi um dos principais motivos para este novo quadro.

As exportações argentinas para o Brasil representaram, em julho, 6,5% do total importado pelo Brasil - principal sócio comercial argentino.

São dados da consultoria Abeceb, de Buenos Aires, com base nos números do Ministério brasileiro do Desenvolvimento, Indústria e Comércio Exterior, de primeiro de agosto.

Por sua vez, o déficit comercial argentino, de quase US$ 400 milhões com o Brasil corresponde a seu já histórico resultado na relação bilateral, de acordo com análise da Abeceb.

Em termos gerais, o comércio bilateral registrou aumento de 18,7% em julho em relação ao mesmo mês de 2012, com um total de US$ 3.3 bilhões.

O resultado foi, porém, deficitário para a Argentina porque as importações feitas pelo País, do Brasil, aumentaram, mas suas exportações para o mercado brasileiro não responderam o mesmo ritmo.

De acordo com o estudo da Abeceb, o déficit de julho corresponde a uma questão “estrutural do comércio”.

Vale recordar que a moeda brasileira, o real, está valorizada na comparação com o peso argentino - o que tradicionalmente foi preocupação do setor industrial argentino que temia e teme que um real desvalorizado tire a competitividae dos produtos nacionais.

Em julho, as compras argentinas do Brasil subiram 25,2% em relação ao mesmo mês de 2012 – sendo de cerca de US$ 1,8 bilhões.

Já as exportações argentinas para o mercado vizinho foram de pouco mais de US$ 1,4 bilhões –  11,3% acima do que foi registrado em julho de 2012.  As duas economias estão em processo de menor crescimento, segundo dados oficiais do Brasil e de acordo com previsões do setor privado argentino.

Entre os principais produtos desta balança comercial destacam-se os que compõem o setor automotivo.

===========

Brésil : Le commerce extérieur se dégrade, baisse des exportations

Les Échos (França), 2/07/2013

Le Brésil a accusé en juillet un déficit commercial pour le quatrième mois depuis le début de l'année, selon des statistiques publiées jeudi qui laissent craindre un solde négatif pour l'ensemble de 2013 - une situation que le pays n'a plus connue depuis plus d'une décennie.

Le déficit des échanges extérieurs s'est monté à 1,897 milliard de dollars (1,44 milliard d'euros) le mois dernier, alors que huit économistes interrogés par Reuters tablaient en moyenne sur un excédent de 480 millions.

Le Brésil, gros exportateur de matières premières comme le soja ou minerai de fer, avait enregistré un excédent de 2,39 milliards en juin.

Depuis le début de l'année, le pays a accumulé un déficit commercial de 4,989 milliards de dollars, à comparer à un excédent de 9,9 milliards sur les sept premiers mois de 2012.

Les exportations pâtissent à la fois de la baisse de valeur des produits brésiliens et d'une demande plus faible à l'étranger. Les importations, à l'inverse, sont restées robustes malgré la dépréciation de la monnaie brésilienne face au dollar.

O novo mapa mundial da energia - Financial Times, The Economist

Shale potential could alter global trade, says US official 

By Anna Fifield in Washington

Financial Times, August 2, 2013

The development of all the shale gas and oil resources in China and Europe would change the nature of the international energy trade, Ernest Moniz, the new US energy secretary, has said.

His comments came days after a billionaire Saudi Arabian investor gave warning of the threat the US shale boom posed to his country.

Mr Moniz, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology physicist who was confirmed as President Barack Obama’s energy secretary in May, said there would be “geopolitical consequences” if the shale oil and gas resources around the world were developed.

“Clearly, if all of the shale resources that have been talked about globally – the 1,200tn cubic feet in China, the significant hundreds of trillions of cubic feet in Europe and eastern Europe – if those were all developed, obviously it would affect trade flows,” he said at a breakfast briefing organised by the Christian Science Monitor.

“We’ve seen that in microcosm in this country, where what used to be almost purely south-to-north flows have gotten much more complex as different geographies come in,” said Mr Moniz. “Clearly the same thing would happen internationally. There would obviously be geopolitical consequences in terms of where gas is flowing.”

The US has been enjoying a shale boom triggered by technological advances that have made it possible to extract gas and oil from previously unproductive rocks – notably in North Dakota.

As a result, the International Energy Agency projects that the US will overtake Saudi Arabia and Russia to become the world’s largest global oil producer by 2020 and could be almost self-sufficient in energy by 2035.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a Saudi Arabian investor, said on Sunday that his country’s oil-dependent economy was increasingly vulnerable to competition from the US shale revolution.

In an open letter addressed to Ali al-Naimi, the Saudi oil minister, and copied to his uncle, King Abdullah, the prince called on the government to accelerate plans to diversify the economy.

“Our country is facing continuous threat because of its almost total dependency on oil,” he wrote in the letter, which set him at odds with his country’s oil ministry and Opec officials.

Mr Moniz said he had not read the letter, but was familiar with its premise.

He said that logistical challenges could stymie efforts to export gas.

“It’s always going to be the case that the cost of moving gas relative to its intrinsic value is high, whereas for oil, it’s extremely small,” he said. “So there’s a fundamental difference when it comes to physics as to why the markets will never be the same in my view.”

============

Yesterday’s fuel

Editorial The Economist, August 2, 2013

The world’s thirst for oil could be nearing a peak. That is bad news for producers, excellent for everyone else

THE dawn of the oil age was fairly recent. Although the stuff was used to waterproof boats in the Middle East 6,000 years ago, extracting it in earnest began only in 1859 after an oil strike in Pennsylvania. The first barrels of crude fetched $18 (around $450 at today’s prices). It was used to make kerosene, the main fuel for artificial lighting after overfishing led to a shortage of whale blubber. Other liquids produced in the refining process, too unstable or smoky for lamplight, were burned or dumped. But the unwanted petrol and diesel did not go to waste for long, thanks to the development of the internal-combustion engine a few years later.

Since then demand for oil has, with a couple of blips in the 1970s and 1980s, risen steadily alongside ever-increasing travel by car, plane and ship. Three-fifths of it ends up in fuel tanks. With billions of Chinese and Indians growing richer and itching to get behind the wheel of a car, the big oil companies, the International Energy Agency (IEA) and America’s Energy Information Administration all predict that demand will keep on rising. One of the oil giants, Britain’s BP, reckons it will grow from 89m b/d now to 104m b/d by 2030.

Scraping the barrel 

We believe that they are wrong, and that oil is close to a peak. This is not the “peak oil” widely discussed several years ago, when several theorists, who have since gone strangely quiet, reckoned that supply would flatten and then fall. We believe that demand, not supply, could decline. In the rich world oil demand has already peaked: it has fallen since 2005. Even allowing for all those new drivers in Beijing and Delhi, two revolutions in technology will dampen the world’s thirst for the black stuff.

The first revolution was led by a Texan who has just died (seearticle). George Mitchell championed “fracking” as a way to release huge supplies of “unconventional” gas from shale beds. This, along with vast new discoveries of conventional gas, has recently helped increase the world’s reserves from 50 to 200 years. In America, where thanks to Mr Mitchell shale gas already billows from the ground, liquefied or compressed gas is finding its way into the tanks of lorries, buses and local-delivery vehicles. Gas could also replace oil in ships, power stations, petrochemical plants and domestic and industrial heating systems, and thus displace a few million barrels of oil a day by 2020.

The other great change is in automotive technology. Rapid advances in engine and vehicle design also threaten oil’s dominance. Foremost is the efficiency of the internal-combustion engine itself. Petrol and diesel engines are becoming ever more frugal. The materials used to make cars are getting lighter and stronger. The growing popularity of electric and hybrid cars, as well as vehicles powered by natural gas or hydrogen fuel cells, will also have an effect on demand for oil. Analysts at Citi, a bank, calculate that if the fuel-efficiency of cars and trucks improves by an average of 2.5% a year it will be enough to constrain oil demand; they predict that a peak of less than 92m b/d will come in the next few years. Ricardo, a big automotive engineer, has come to a similar conclusion.

Not surprisingly, the oil “supermajors” and the IEA disagree. They point out that most of the emerging world has a long way to go before it owns as many cars, or drives as many miles per head, as America.

But it would be foolish to extrapolate from the rich world’s past to booming Asia’s future. The sort of environmental policies that are reducing the thirst for fuel in Europe and America by imposing ever-tougher fuel-efficiency standards on vehicles are also being adopted in the emerging economies. China recently introduced its own set of fuel-economy measures. If, as a result of its determination to reduce its dependence on imported oil, the regime imposes policies designed to “leapfrog” the country’s transport system to hybrids, oil demand will come under even more pressure.

A fit of peak

A couple of countervailing factors could kick in to increase consumption. First, the Saudis, who control 11% of output and have the most spare capacity, may decide to push out more, lowering prices and thus increasing demand. Then again, they might cut production to try to raise prices, thereby lowering demand further. Second, if declining demand pushes down the oil price, drivers may turn back to gas-guzzling cars, as they did when oil was cheap in the 1990s. But tightening emissions standards should make that harder in future.

If the demand for oil merely stabilises, it will have important consequences. The environment should fare a little better. Gas vehicles emit less carbon dioxide than equivalent petrol-powered ones.

The corporate pecking order will change, too. Currently, Exxon Mobil vies with Apple as the world’s biggest listed company. Yet Exxon and the other oil supermajors are more vulnerable than they look (see article). Bernstein, a research firm, reckons that new barrels of oil from the Arctic or other technologically (or politically) demanding environments now cost $100 to extract. Big Oil can still have a decent future as Big Gas, but that will not prove as profitable.

The biggest impact of declining demand could be geopolitical. Oil underpins Vladimir Putin’s kleptocracy. The Kremlin will find it more difficult to impose its will on the country if its main source of patronage is diminished. The Saudi princes have relied on a high oil price to balance their budgets while paying for lavish social programmes to placate the restless young generation that has taken to the streets elsewhere. Their huge financial reserves can plug the gap for a while; but if the oil flows into the kingdom’s coffers less readily, buying off the opposition will be harder and the chances of upheaval greater. And if America is heading towards shale-powered energy self-sufficiency, it is unlikely to be as indulgent in future towards the Arab allies it propped up in the past. In its rise, oil has fuelled many conflicts. It may continue to do so as it falls. For all that, most people will welcome the change.

Hayek, Mao e o grande salto para a fome que eliminou 30 milhoes de chineses - Yang Jisheng

Não preciso acrescentar absolutamente nada ao que já escreveu esse autor chinês, autor de um dos mais recentes estudos sobre a mortandade inimaginável causada por Mao Tsé-tung na China, com o seu "grande salto para a frente", entre 1958 e 1962. Foi, na verdade, um enorme salto para trás, pior: um salto no precipício da fome, do canibalismo, do morticínio sistemático de milhões de chineses.

Yang Jisheng — How Hayek Helped Me Understand China’s Tragedy

By Greg Ransom

Hayek Center, on May 29th, 2013

Yang Jisheng’s 2013 Manhattan Institute Hayek Prize lecture:

In the space of four years, from 1958 to 1962, China experienced a disaster of historic proportions – the death by starvation of more than 30 million people. This occurred in a time of peace, without epidemic or abnormal climatic conditions. A confluence of historical factors caused China’s leadership clique to follow the path of the Soviet Union, which was supposed to make China strong and prosperous. Instead, it brought inconceivable misery, bearing witness to what Friedrich Hayek wrote in The Road to Serfdom: “Is there a greater tragedy imaginable than that, in our endeavor consciously to shape our future in accordance with high ideals, we should in fact unwittingly produce the very opposite of what we have been striving for?”

Why did Mao Zedong’s great ideals create such great tragedy? The answer can be found in Hayek’s writings. China’s revolutionaries built a system based on what Hayek called “the Great Utopia,” which required “central direction and organization of all our activities according to some consciously constructed ‘blueprint’” and for a “unitary end” while “refusing to recognize autonomous spheres in which the ends of the individuals are supreme.” In China’s case, this “unitary end” was the “Great Utopia” of communism.

In order to bring about this Great Utopia, China’s leaders constructed an all-encompassing and omnipotent state, eliminating private ownership, the market and competition. The state controlled the vast majority of social resources and monopolized production and distribution, making every individual completely dependent on it. The government decided the type and density of crops planted in each location, and yields were taken and distributed by the state. The result was massive food shortages, as the state’s inability to ration food successfully doomed tens of millions of rural Chinese to a lingering death.

The designers of this system expected an economy organized under unified planning to result in efficiency. Instead, it brought shortage. Government monopoly blunted the basic impetus for economic function – personal enthusiasm, creativity and initiative – and eliminated the opportunity and space for free personal choice. Economic development ground to a halt. The extreme poverty of Mao’s China was the inevitable result.

An economy with “everything being directed from a single center” requires totalitarianism as its political system. And since absolute power corrupts absolutely, the result was not the egalitarianism anticipated by the designers of this system, but an officialdom that oppressed the Chinese people.

Hayek championed classical liberalism based on the principle that “in the ordering of our affairs we should make as much use as possible of the spontaneous forces of society, and resort as little as possible to coercion.” In today’s China, such liberals are found either among the very old or the very young, skipping a generation in between. I happen to belong to the skipped generation that had little exposure to liberalism under Mao. Up until I was 40 years old, I still believed in collectivism, which fettered my thinking and confined my insight. Reading The Road to Serfdom gave me a new perspective on economics, politics, the state and society. Hayek helped me understand China’s tragedy; my research into the disasters China suffered helped me understand Hayek.

Whether or not Beijing will admit it, China is beholden to Hayek’s thinking in relinquishing the highly centralized planning of its economy in favor of competitive markets and private enterprise. This choice is making China prosperous and has elevated it to the world’s second largest economy.

Yet, while China has accepted some of Hayek’s thinking on markets, it continues to insist on “socialism with Chinese characteristics.” The powerful run and control the market in a system I call the “power market economy.” The greatest problem with a power market economy is its inequity. Hayek noted that “a world in which the wealthy are powerful is still a better world than one in which only the already powerful can acquire wealth.” In today’s China, only the well-connected can acquire great wealth; society’s riches are concentrated among those in power. This is the source of the current popular resentment against officialdom and the wealthy elite. A power market economy cannot possibly meet the Chinese government’s vaunted objective of a stable and harmonious society.

China’s path to harmony and stability is to reject this system and instead to heed Hayek’s call to avoid government coercion, respect individual freedom and allow further economic and political liberalization. Will it? Li Shenzhi, one of China’s great proponents of liberalism, voiced a generally held pessimism to me in 2001, two years before his death: “We’ve entered a new century, and liberals face a hard winter. Even so,” he continued, quoting the poet Shelley, “if winter comes, can spring be far behind?”

The fate of liberalism in China is the fate of Hayek’s teachings, which must endure a harsh and bitter winter but could yet see a resplendent spring.

Yang Jisheng is the author of Tombstone, an account of the Great Famine in China during the Great Leap Forward.  Yang and his book were awarded The Manhattan Institute’s 2012 Hayek Prize, honoring the book published within the last two years that best reflects F.A. Hayek’s vision of economic and individual liberty.

- See more at: http://hayekcenter.org/#sthash.fz6mla0b.dpuf

Brasil: adivinhe quem produz volatilidade?; o proprio Governo - Celso Ming

Conhece aquela história dos capitais especulativos, de motel (como gostava de dizer um dos gênios econômicos deste governo) e que produziriam volatilidade na economia?
Pois bem: esqueça.
O principal responsável pelo caráter errático da economia brasileira é o próprio governo, com suas políticas econômicas esquizofrênicas, desencontradas, contraditórias...
Só não vê quem não quer...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Montanha-russa

CELSO MING - O Estado de S.Paulo, 02 de agosto de 2013

O desempenho da produção industrial medido pelo IBGE se transformou em montanha-russa. Junho apontou para um crescimento aparentemente forte, de 1,9% sobre o mês anterior que, no entanto, mostrara recuo de 1,8%. Os dados de julho não estão disponíveis, mas as indicações são de novo tombo (veja o gráfico).

Essa volatilidade sugere que se comparem estatísticas de prazo mais longo. E, no entanto, também elas não autorizam comemorações. Em todo o primeiro semestre, a produção industrial cresceu apenas 1,9% e, em 12 meses, 0,2%.

Difícil de discordar do pessimismo do diretor de Pesquisas e Estudos Econômicos da Fiesp, Paulo Francini: "Não conseguimos enxergar sinais de recuperação", disse quarta-feira.

O único atenuante para o quadro pouco animador é o surpreendente desempenho da indústria de bens de capital (máquinas e equipamentos) que avançou 6,3% no semestre e 18% em 12 meses. Indica que os investimentos não pararam, o que se confirma com as estatísticas de importação (veja o Confira).

Os problemas de fundo são conhecidos e quase nada mudaram. Concentram-se na baixa competitividade do setor produtivo que, por sua vez, tem a ver com os custos altos demais, sobretudo dos impostos e dos juros; com a infraestrutura precária e cara; e com falta de abertura de novos mercados externos.

Em tese, a desvalorização cambial, de 15% nos últimos três meses, deveria devolver competitividade ao setor. Mas isso não está acontecendo, aparentemente pela forte dependência da indústria de fornecimentos externos: matérias-primas, componentes, máquinas e capital de giro (empréstimos externos).

Foi a razão pela qual ontem o ministro da Fazenda, Guido Mantega, anunciou medida que reduz a alíquota do Imposto de Importação (tarifa alfandegária) de cerca de cem produtos. O objetivo declarado é compensar com menos imposto o aumento dos preços provocado pela alta do dólar no câmbio interno.

Em princípio, esta não é uma prática adequada. O Imposto de Importação tem funções regulatórias. Serve para calibrar o comércio exterior. Quando usado ou para arrecadar ou para fazer política de preços tende a provocar distorções. Se as tarifas estavam no tamanho adequado, uma redução leva a desequilíbrios no fluxo de mercadorias ou imediatos ou de médio prazo. Se não estavam, então teria sido necessário contemplar mais produtos. Além disso, como não podem alcançar todo o universo da pauta de importações, cortes pontuais causam desalinhamento de preços relativos. O barateamento de matérias-primas importadas para plásticos, por exemplo, pode prejudicar outros tipos de embalagem, como as de vidro ou de cerâmica.

No entanto, pouca coisa trava mais o desempenho da indústria do que a falta de confiança na economia. Quando pairam dúvidas, como hoje, sobre a solidez dos fundamentos; quando se vê que o governo não consegue levar adiante o que começa, como o processo de desoneração tributária; e quando o governo reage aos problemas com soluções improvisadas (puxadinhos) a recuperação fica mais difícil.

Enquanto isso, no quinto membro do Mercosul... Venezuela se supera...

Dois exemplos, entre muitos outros da nova democracia bolivariana que passa a pautar os futuros caminhos do Mercosul...

'Hegemonia comunicacional'

Editorial O Estado de S.Paulo, 02 de agosto de 2013

Quando anunciou recentemente que o governo da Venezuela pretendia construir uma "hegemonia comunicacional", o ministro da Comunicação, Ernesto Villegas, não estava para brincadeira. Depois de sufocar as redes de TV independentes por meio de terrorismo judiciário e leis de exceção, o regime chavista ampliou seu assédio aos jornais que ainda ousam criticar o governo.

O último caso envolve Miguel Henrique Otero, que dirige o El Nacional, um dos mais influentes jornais do país. A procuradora-geral da Venezuela, Luisa Ortega Díaz, pediu o congelamento das contas e dos bens de Otero, por suspeita de corrupção. A Justiça, sob total controle do chavismo, prontamente atendeu.

Segundo Luisa, Alfredo Peña, ex-prefeito de Caracas, acusa Otero de lhe dever US$ 3,5 milhões, supostamente emprestados em janeiro de 2003 a título de ajuda para o El Nacional. Na época, o jornal enfrentava dificuldades em razão da queda de receita publicitária causada pela greve na PDVSA, a estatal de petróleo, contra o governo.

Otero nega que tenha recebido dinheiro de Peña. Segundo ele, é impossível, "mesmo que se use a mais viva imaginação", aceitar que um funcionário público tenha tido condições de emprestar tamanha soma, incompatível com o patrimônio do ex-prefeito.

A estultícia não se limita ao processo em si. Otero ficou sabendo do pedido de congelamento de seus bens não por meio de uma notificação formal, como seria de esperar em regimes onde vigora o Estado de Direito, e sim depois que a procuradora-geral anunciou a medida pelo Twitter. Sabendo-se que tanto a procuradora-geral como os mais graduados magistrados do Judiciário são zelosos soldados do chavismo, já é possível antecipar que a causa de Otero é perdida.

O fato é que, embora esdrúxulo, o processo de Peña contra Otero está sendo explorado pelo regime chavista e sua máquina de moer opositores para depauperar mais um de seus adversários na mídia. O procedimento é conhecido e ficou claro no caso das emissoras de TV.

Houve episódios de brutalidade explícita, como a ocupação militar da RCTV, a mais antiga emissora da Venezuela, em 2007. O canal foi tirado do ar sob a acusação de ter participado da tentativa de golpe contra Chávez, em 2002. Em seu lugar, entrou a chapa branca Televisora Venezolana Social.

Com o tempo, o processo ficou mais sofisticado. Em vez de invadir e ocupar, o governo passou a sufocar esses canais. O caso da Globovisión é exemplar: acossada por processos judiciais diversos movidos pelo governo, a maior emissora independente da Venezuela capitulou no início deste ano, passando a ser controlada por empresários afinados com o regime. A manobra não tardou a dar frutos: na última eleição presidencial, o canal demitiu um apresentador por ter exibido trechos de um comício do opositor Henrique Capriles.

Em meio a tanta truculência, a autocensura tornou-se comum entre os poucos meios de comunicação que ainda não estão alinhados ao governo. Para aqueles que resistem, a ameaça de algum tipo de punição é permanente. Nelson Bocaranda, o principal blogueiro independente da Venezuela, foi convocado pela procuradora-geral, Luisa Díaz, para dar explicações sobre sua suposta participação na difusão de "mensagens subliminares" que teriam incitado os protestos violentos após as eleições de abril.

Outro grupo de mídia da Venezuela, o Sexto Poder, está sendo objeto dessa "campanha de fustigamento contra a imprensa independente", nas palavras da Sociedade Interamericana de Imprensa (SIP). O Sexto Poder "não pode pagar seus empregados nem seus fornecedores", segundo a SIP, e seu principal dirigente, Leocenis García, foi preso sob acusação de sonegação e enriquecimento ilícito. Claudio Paolillo, da Comissão de Liberdade de Imprensa da SIP, denunciou a manobra do governo venezuelano, que "não fecha os meios de forma direta, pelo custo político que isso acarreta, mas os afoga economicamente, obtendo o mesmo resultado".

==========

Henrique Capriles Radonski

Pendientes en cada estado, se están convocando también para el sábado 3/08 concentraciones contra el Gobierno fascista, corrupto e ilegítimo. En el exterior también los venezolanos están organizando concentraciones contra este desastre de Gobierno. Ahora los Enchufados convocaron marcha, ¡Que poco originales! Marcharán según contra la corrupción, es decir, contra ellos mismos. Nada más corrupto que un Enchufado del Gobierno. Ayudemos en la convocatoria porque el Enchufado de Comunicaciones sigue presionando a los medios, usemos el HT #elsabado3porvzla #Sábado3AlosRuices

Libertarianismo: entrevista com Hans-Hermann Hoppe na revista brasileira Dicta & Contradicta

The Logical Beauty of Libertarianism
by Hans-Hermann Hoppe on August 2, 2013

[The Brazilian Philosophy Magazine Dicta & Contradicta interviews Hans-Hermann Hoppe. July 15, 2013.]

Would the change from a statist to a libertarian society help or hinder the production of high culture?

Hoppe: A libertarian society would be significantly more prosperous and wealthy and this would certainly help both low and high culture. But a free society — a society without taxes and tax-subsidies and without so-called “intellectual property rights” — would produce a very different culture, with a very different set of products, producers, stars, and failures.

You see a causal link between a society’s form of government and its moral values and social development. Do you see a similar link between type of government and aesthetic standards and quality of art and entertainment?

Hoppe: Yes I do. Democratic state government systematically promotes egalitarianism and relativism. In the field of human interaction, it leads to the subversion and ultimately disappearance of the idea of eternal and universal principles of justice. Law is swamped and submerged by legislation. In the field of the arts and of aesthetic judgment, democracy leads to the subversion and ultimately disappearance of the notion of beauty and universal standards of beauty. Beauty is swamped and submerged by so-called “modern art.”

Given that libertarian communities could freely banish dissenters for disagreeing with any given opinion, would there be more or less free intellectual discussion in a libertarian world as opposed to ours? And as opposed to a world composed of traditional monarchies?

Hoppe: Private property entitles its owner to discriminate: to exclude or include others from his property and to determine the conditions of entry and inclusion. Both inclusion and exclusion have associated costs and benefits for the owner, which he weighs against each other when he makes his decision. In any case, the owner’s decision is motivated by his concern for his property and by reason. His reasoning may turn out correct and he reaches his goal or it may turn out wrong, but in any case, the owner’s is a reasoned decision.

The founder and developer of a private community, then, would not likely discriminate and exclude based on mere differences of opinion. Or if he did he would not likely attract more than a guru’s following as subscribers. Typically, discrimination will be based on differences in conduct, expression and appearance, on what people do and how they act in public, on language, religion, ethnicity, customs, social class, etc. The owner discriminates in order to achieve a high degree of homogeneity-of-conduct in his community and so avoid or reduce intra-communal tension and conflict — in economic jargon: to reduce transaction costs; and he does so in the expectation that his decision will be good for his property and community.

In any case, in a libertarian world there would indeed be far more discrimination than in the present statist world, which is characterized by countless anti-discrimination laws and, consequently, ubiquitous forced integration. In particular, whatever other criteria may be used for inclusion or exclusion, in a libertarian world, for instance, no private community owner would want to tolerate — and not discriminate against — communist or socialist activists on his property. As enemies of the very institution on which the community rests, they would be excluded or expelled — but they would of course remain free to establish their own communist commune, kibbutzim, or whatever other “lifestyle experiment” they come up with.

In sum and to finally answer your question, then, a libertarian world would be characterized by a far greater variety of different, but internally relatively homogeneous communities, and consequently the range, diversity, and vigor of intellectual discussion in all likelihood would far surpass anything experienced presently or at any time in the past.

Do libertarian political and ethical positions have any relation to certain aesthetic and artistic judgments? Is there any incoherence in a libertarian who is a lover of, say, Soviet Realism?

Hoppe: From a purely logical point of view, libertarianism is compatible with each and every aesthetic and artistic style or judgment. I am not the first one to notice, for instance, that famous libertarian Ayn Rand’s artistic work displays a striking stylistic resemblance to Socialist Soviet Realism. Similarly, I have seen it possible to be a “perfect” libertarian and never aggress against anyone’s person or property, and yet be an all-around useless, unpleasant or even rotten fellow.

Psychologically matters are different, however. Here, in the realm of psychology we sense that life as a peaceful bum or as a lover of Soviet Realist art is somehow incompatible and at odds with the life of a self-conscious libertarian. When we see such conduct or taste displayed in a professed libertarian, it causes us emotional or aesthetic distress and dissonance. And rightly so, I believe. Because the human experience is characterized by the integrated whole of three abilities: of the recognition of truth, of justice and of beauty. We can distinguish between true and false, we can distinguish right from wrong, and we can distinguish between the beautiful (and perfection) and the ugly (and the imperfect) — and we can speak and reflect on all three notions. A whole and complete human life, then, should not only be truthful and just, it should also be a good life. Maybe not beautiful and perfect, but a life striving toward beauty and perfection. An exemplary, morally and aesthetically uplifting and inspiring life. It is here, where the peaceful bum and the Soviet-Realism-lover are lacking.

Alternatively, does art have a role to play in shaping political and philosophical ideas? Can this be done other than as propaganda for a given ideology?

Hoppe: The purpose of the visual arts and of music is the creation of beauty in all its manifestations. It has no further philosophical implications. Yet beautiful art and music and libertarianism have one important commonality. Libertarianism, too, is beautiful. Not aesthetically, of course, but logically, as a simple and elegant social theory.

As for the wholly or partially discursive — narrative — arts, yes, they can serve as a vehicle for the promotion of political and philosophical ideas. You can call this propaganda. But these ideas can be true and good or false and evil. And although I am not an artsy person, I rather have more artists propagandizing the true and good ideas of private property and of capitalism as Ayn Rand, for instance, and fewer artists propagandizing the false and evil ideas of public property and of socialism as, let’s say, Bertolt Brecht. But a philosophical agenda is neither necessary to make for art — one can also tell a story for its own sake. Nor is a philosophical purpose sufficient to make for art. To make for art, a narrative must above all be characterized by truthfulness (in the widest sense of the term), by intelligibility, logical coherence, a mastery of language, expression and style, and a sense of humanity and of human justice: of agency and the intentional and the non-intentional in life, of right and wrong, and good and bad.

Do the ideas discussed by intellectuals have any practical effect on the history of human society?

Hoppe: I am no fan of J. M. Keynes. But when he said, that “the ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed, the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist,” he was right. In fact, Keynes is the very defunct economist, pronouncing wrong ideas at that, to whom the practical men of today are intellectually enslaved.

Is academic life in its present state a healthy environment for an intellectual? Can he survive as an intellectual anywhere else?

Hoppe: That depends on the intellectual. Academic life can be very comfortable for someone spouting forth politically correct leftist platitudes for years on end. On the other hand, for an Austro-Libertarian — and even more so a culturally conservative Austro-Libertarian — academic life is difficult and often maddening. With persistence and some luck you can make it and survive, but if you don’t sell out or at least shut up, you should be prepared to pay a price.

Nowadays, however, thanks to the Internet, you can also survive as an intellectual outside official academia. With minimal entrance-cost the competition is fierce, but the opportunities seem boundless. Encouragingly, there are already quite a few Austro-Libertarian intellectuals today, who have earned prominence and money via this route.

If you could magically change one belief in the minds of all people in present societies, what would it be and why?

Hoppe: I agree in this with my principal teacher, mentor, and master Murray Rothbard. I would only want people to recognize matters for what they truly are. I would want them to recognize taxes as robbery, politicians as thieves, and the entire state apparatus and bureaucracy as a protection racket, a Mafia-like enterprise, only far bigger and more dangerous. In short: I would want them to hate the State. If everyone believed and did this, then, as É. de la Boétie has shown, all power of the state would almost instantly vanish.

What positive influence did Habermas have on your thought? Were there negative influences from him as well?

Hoppe: Habermas was my principal philosophy teacher and Ph.D. advisor during my studies at the Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, from 1968-74. Through his seminars I became acquainted with British and American analytical philosophy. I read K. Popper, P. Feyerabend, L. Wittgenstein, G. Ryle, J.L. Austin, J. Searle, W.v.O. Quine, H. Putnam, N. Chomsky, J. Piaget. I discovered Paul Lorenzen and the Erlangen School and the work of K.O Apel. I still believe that this was a pretty good intellectual training.

Personally, then, I have no regrets. As for Habermas’s influence on Germany and German public opinion, however, it has been an unmitigated disaster, at least from a libertarian viewpoint. Habermas is today Germany’s most celebrated public intellectual and High Priest of “Political Correctness”: of social democracy and welfare-statism, of multi-culturalism, anti-discrimination (affirmative action) and political centralization spiced, especially for German consumption, with a heavy dose of “anti-fascist” rhetoric and “collective guilt” — mongering.

Is it worthwhile to read literature? What is your favorite literary book?

Hoppe: This everyone must decide for himself. Personally, I have never read much literature. If I want to do some “lighter” reading, I typically read history, including historical novels, biographies, or literary and cultural criticism à la H.L. Mencken or Tom Wolfe.

Hans-Hermann Hoppe, an Austrian School economist and anarchocapitalist philosopher, is professor emeritus of economics at UNLV, a distinguished fellow with the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and founder and president of The Property and Freedom Society. Send him mail. See Hans-Hermann Hoppe's article archives.
You can subscribe to future articles by Hans-Hermann Hoppe via this RSS feed.

Iran: destruir Israel continua a ser politica de Estado com novo presidente

Oriente Médio

Novo presidente do Irã insulta Israel, que reage

Premiê israelense diz que Rouhani mostrou sua "verdadeira cara"

Veja.com, 2/08/2013

O clérigo reformista Hassan Rohani venceu as eleições presidenciais (Majid Hagdost/Reuters)

O presidente recém eleito do Irã, o clérigo Hassan Rohani, deu nesta sexta-feira uma mostra clara de como será seu governo: em evento do chamado Dia de Qods, em apoio aos direitos dos palestinos, afirmou que Israel é uma  "chaga" que deve ser removida da região. O primeiro-ministro israelense Benjamin Netanyahu reagiu dizendo que o iraniano mostrou sua "verdadeira cara".

"O regime sionista é uma chaga que se estabeleceu no corpo do mundo muçulmano por anos e deve ser removida", disse Rohani. E Netanyahu respondeu: "A verdadeira face de Rohani foi revelada antes que o esperado... Isso é o que pensa e isto é o que o regime iraniano tem como plano de ação". O premiê israelense pediu ao mundo que despreze suas esperanças de mudança no Irã perante a eleição de Hassan Rohani.

Leia também:  Netanyahu diz que pode agir contra o Irã antes dos EUA

Para Netanyahu, as declarações de Rohani "devem despertar o mundo da ilusão de que uma parte da comunidade internacional teve após as eleições no Irã". "O presidente lá mudou, mas o objetivo do regime não: conseguir armas nucleares para ameaçar Israel, o Oriente Médio, a paz e a segurança internacional", disse Netanyahu, acrescentando: "Não devemos permitir que um Estado que ameaça destruir o Estado de Israel chegue a ter armas de destruição em massa".

Saiba mais: Obama vê vitória de Rohani como sinal de esperança

Rohani fez seus comentários durante a comemoração nesta sexta-feira do "Dia de Al Quds" (nome árabe de Jerusalém), realizado desde 1979, para expressar rejeição contra a ocupação pelo estado israelense. Rohani era o único candidato reformista que disputava a presidência iraniana este ano, junto a outros quatro conservadores e um tecnocrata. Ele foi apoiado pelos ex-presidentes reformistas Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani e Mohamed Khatami.

(Com agências EFE e France-Presse)