Uma palestra feita no ano passado em Londrina, não disponível até aqui, pois pretendia escrever um texto explicativo sobre os slides apresentados, o que infelizmente não foi possível até aqui, por isso a disponibilização, neste momento, da palestra abaixo:
3178. “Direito e relações
internacionais no contexto brasileiro”, Brasília, 14 outubro 2017, 25 slides.
Apresentação em PP, remetendo ao trabalho n. 3098, para a VI Semana do Direito,
na Faculdade Arthur Thomas, de Londrina, em 16/10/2017. Disponível na plataforma Academia.edu (http://www.academia.edu/36293016/3178DireitoRelaIntContextoBrLondrina.pptx).
O trabalho citado é este aqui:
3098. “A
política externa e a diplomacia brasileira no século XXI”, Brasília, 24
março 2017, 12 p. Notas para aula inaugural no Curso de Pós-Graduação Lato
Sensu em Diplomacia e Relações Internacionais da UFG, em Goiânia, em
24/03/2017. Publicado no Diplomatizzando (http://diplomatizzando.blogspot.com.br/2017/03/a-politica-externa-e-diplomacia.html).
Refeito em 20/04 e aproveitado para palestra no Curso de Direito da USP, a
convite de Wagner Menezes, em 24 de abril de 2017. Versão esta disponibilizada
em 21/04/2017 no blog Diplomatizzando
(link: http://diplomatizzando.blogspot.com.br/2017/04/a-politica-externa-e-diplomacia.html).
Mas, a apresentação também se baseia nestes outros trabalhos:
3023. “A construção do
direito internacional do Brasil a partir dos pareceres dos consultores
jurídicos do Itamaraty: do Império à República”, Brasília, 19 agosto 2016, 47
p.; revisto em 26/08/2016, 49 p. Ensaio bibliográfico a partir dos pareceres
dos consultores jurídicos do Itamaraty e das consultas da seção dos Negócios
Estrangeiros do Conselho de Estado nas obras publicadas pela Funag e Senado
Federal; preparado primordialmente para o 14o. Congresso Brasileiro
de Direito Internacional, realizado em Gramado, RS, de 31/08 a 3/09/2016, por
iniciativa de Wagner Menezes.
Nova versão, ampliada, com novos links acrescentados aos livros citados na
bibliografia, postado na plataforma Academia.edu (26/08/2016, link: https://www.academia.edu/s/224fb86980/3023-a-construcao-do-direito-internacional-do-brasil-a-partir-dos-pareceres-dos-consultores-juridicos-do-itamaraty-do-imperio-a-republica-2016).
Feita versão visual em Power Point para apresentação no Congresso de Gramado,
sob n. 3028, postada igualmente na
plataforma Academia.edu (link: http://www.academia.edu/28053979/3028_Apresentacao_Paulo_Roberto_de_Almeida_Gramado_2016_).
Publicado nos Cadernos de Política
Exterior (Brasília: Instituto de Pesquisa de Relações Internacionais, Funag-MRE;
ano II, n. 4, segundo semestre 2016, p. 241-298; ISSN: 2359-5280; link: http://funag.gov.br/loja/download/1186-cadernos-de-politica-exterior-ano-2-volume-4.pdf).
Publicado no número especial do Boletim
da Sociedade Brasileira de Direito Internacional Boletim da Sociedade Brasileira de Direito Internacional (Órgão
oficial da SBDI; ano CIII, vol. 103, julho-dezembro 2017, n. 125-130, 2017, p.
1153-1211; ISSN: 0103-8451). Relação de publicados n. 1238 e 1270.
3028. “A construção do
direito internacional do Brasil a partir dos pareceres dos consultores
jurídicos do Itamaraty: do Império à República”, Brasília, 27 agosto 2016, 18
slides. Apresentação em Power Point, a partir do trabalho n. 3023, relativa aos
pareceres dos consultores jurídicos do Itamaraty e das consultas da seção dos
Negócios Estrangeiros do Conselho de Estado nas obras publicadas pela Funag e
Senado Federal; preparada para o 14o. Congresso Brasileiro de
Direito Internacional, realizado em Gramado, RS, no dia 1/09/2016. Postado na
plataforma Academia.edu em formato pdf (link: http://www.academia.edu/28053979/3028_Apresentacao_Paulo_Roberto_de_Almeida_Gramado_2016_).
sexta-feira, 30 de março de 2018
Brexit: take it or leave it - Oliver Wiseman (CapX)
Brexit's anti-climaxOliver Wiseman
CapX, March 30, 2018
Is Brexit a good idea? It sounds odd to ask so straightforward a question about such a well-worn subject. We are leaving. In a year. The referendum was two years ago. We are quite some way past weighing up the pros and cons.
So why ask the question? Because there’s long been a collective notion that once we have left the EU, and the transition period is over, the facts about our circumstances will offer up a definitive answer, that one side will be proved right, and that the debate will be settled.
Remainers convinced that Brexit will be a disaster take solace in their conviction that when the economy crumbles, it will be blindingly obvious that they were right all along.
Leavers, buoyed by the failed predictions of Project Fear, wait with excitement to say 'I told you so' when the sky doesn’t fall in.
Even for the vast majority of us, who see Brexit as neither an unmitigated good or an unparalleled mistake, there is a temptation to switch off - to tell yourself that there’s no point arguing about who was right now because we’ll soon find out.
But I have some bad news: the Brexit question will never be settled. There will be no satisfying finale to the saga.
The first reason for this is that partisans on both sides have inoculated themselves against inconvenient facts. If the economy takes a big hit when we leave, and the upsides of taking back control appear limited, Leavers will say there is nothing wrong with Brexit per se, just this particular form of it. Even if their economic doom-mongering doesn’t come true, Remainers will tell us we would have been even better off had we never left. There will never be a mea culpa moment.
The second, deeper reason is that the differences between Leave and Remain are not just analytical. What you think of Brexit depends on more than your prediction of what sort of deal we will get from Brussels. Its about values and priorities.
Some see national sovereignty as symbolically and practically essential to good government. Others think it illusory. Some value the ability to live and work anywhere in the EU over the ability to keep foreigners from doing the same. Others don’t. In other words, we aren’t all marking Brexit according to the same scoring system.
It’s easy to despair at the prospect of no conclusive ending to Brexit. The thought that we could be stuck in a never-ending cycle of rows about passports, out-of-touch speeches from Tony Blair and nonsensical pronunciations from Nigel Farage doesn’t exactly lift the spirits.
But there’s a more optimistic interpretation. It might help us appreciate that the true significance of our decision to leave is not something hidden behind a curtain, waiting to be revealed when we’re out. It’s that Brexit is what Britain makes of it.
The truth about Brexit is less remarkable than either side claims. It is neither the end of the world nor the solution to all our problems. And if there is nothing intrinsically disastrous or miraculous about Brexit, that means the sort of Brexit we choose is incredibly important.
Take immigration, a major factor in our decision to leave. As Philippe Legrain argued on CapX this week, the current system isn’t fit for purpose. What we replace it with when free movement comes to an end matters hugely. The political, social and economic consequences will be huge. It is a conversation the government keeps putting off, but our immigration system will, one way or another, be a defining feature of post-Brexit Britain.
It is on this and numerous other issues - the regulations we keep and repeal, the taxes we raise and lower, the laws we make and amend - that the battle for Brexit will really be fought. And those who are waiting to see how it pans out are missing their chance to shape it.
Below you'll find some of our favourite pieces from the past seven days. Have a great weekend.
Oliver Wiseman
Editor, CapX
CapX, March 30, 2018
Is Brexit a good idea? It sounds odd to ask so straightforward a question about such a well-worn subject. We are leaving. In a year. The referendum was two years ago. We are quite some way past weighing up the pros and cons.
So why ask the question? Because there’s long been a collective notion that once we have left the EU, and the transition period is over, the facts about our circumstances will offer up a definitive answer, that one side will be proved right, and that the debate will be settled.
Remainers convinced that Brexit will be a disaster take solace in their conviction that when the economy crumbles, it will be blindingly obvious that they were right all along.
Leavers, buoyed by the failed predictions of Project Fear, wait with excitement to say 'I told you so' when the sky doesn’t fall in.
Even for the vast majority of us, who see Brexit as neither an unmitigated good or an unparalleled mistake, there is a temptation to switch off - to tell yourself that there’s no point arguing about who was right now because we’ll soon find out.
But I have some bad news: the Brexit question will never be settled. There will be no satisfying finale to the saga.
The first reason for this is that partisans on both sides have inoculated themselves against inconvenient facts. If the economy takes a big hit when we leave, and the upsides of taking back control appear limited, Leavers will say there is nothing wrong with Brexit per se, just this particular form of it. Even if their economic doom-mongering doesn’t come true, Remainers will tell us we would have been even better off had we never left. There will never be a mea culpa moment.
The second, deeper reason is that the differences between Leave and Remain are not just analytical. What you think of Brexit depends on more than your prediction of what sort of deal we will get from Brussels. Its about values and priorities.
Some see national sovereignty as symbolically and practically essential to good government. Others think it illusory. Some value the ability to live and work anywhere in the EU over the ability to keep foreigners from doing the same. Others don’t. In other words, we aren’t all marking Brexit according to the same scoring system.
It’s easy to despair at the prospect of no conclusive ending to Brexit. The thought that we could be stuck in a never-ending cycle of rows about passports, out-of-touch speeches from Tony Blair and nonsensical pronunciations from Nigel Farage doesn’t exactly lift the spirits.
But there’s a more optimistic interpretation. It might help us appreciate that the true significance of our decision to leave is not something hidden behind a curtain, waiting to be revealed when we’re out. It’s that Brexit is what Britain makes of it.
The truth about Brexit is less remarkable than either side claims. It is neither the end of the world nor the solution to all our problems. And if there is nothing intrinsically disastrous or miraculous about Brexit, that means the sort of Brexit we choose is incredibly important.
Take immigration, a major factor in our decision to leave. As Philippe Legrain argued on CapX this week, the current system isn’t fit for purpose. What we replace it with when free movement comes to an end matters hugely. The political, social and economic consequences will be huge. It is a conversation the government keeps putting off, but our immigration system will, one way or another, be a defining feature of post-Brexit Britain.
It is on this and numerous other issues - the regulations we keep and repeal, the taxes we raise and lower, the laws we make and amend - that the battle for Brexit will really be fought. And those who are waiting to see how it pans out are missing their chance to shape it.
Below you'll find some of our favourite pieces from the past seven days. Have a great weekend.
Oliver Wiseman
Editor, CapX
quinta-feira, 29 de março de 2018
Brasil: o futuro que queremos - livro organizado por Jaime Pinsky
Um livro que deverá estar nas livrarias em meados de maio:
Jaime Pinsky
(org.)
Brasil - o futuro que queremos
(São Paulo: Editora Contexto, 2018)
Sumário
Introdução –Jaime Pinsky, 7
Educação – Claudia Costin, 11
Saúde – Paulo Saldiva, 25
Cidades, Jaime Lerner - 43
Moradia, Nabil Bonduki - 61
Segurança pública – Eduardo
Muylaert, 87
Ciência e tecnologia – Glauco
Arbix, 107
Economia e finanças – Luís
Eduardo Assis, 141
Política econômica – Antonio
Corrêa de Lacerda, 163
Relações internacionais – Paulo
Roberto de Almeida, 185
Agricultura – Roberto Rodrigues, 203
Meio ambiente – Fabio Feldmann, 223
Esporte – Milton Leite, 237
Os autores, 251
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)