4.29.2009

Swine flu in Venezuela?



Of course the swine flu is all over the news. The alert level was recently raised to 5 (of 6) which means that its a worldwide pandemic.

However, it was a regular day for Venezuelan politics. President Hugo Chavez went yesterday on national television saying that there was not a single case of swine influenza in Venezuela. Also, continuing with the dictated line, the Health Minister also went on national television saying that some cases in Merida where they initially thought was swine flu, they are not, so Venezuela is protected against swine flu.

Now, do you really believe what these public officials are saying? Apparently it has been almost 4 weeks since the first case of swine flu in Mexico, and now a world pandemic. I do not want to sound alarming or controversial, but did you Mexicana has a daily non stop flight between Caracas and Mexico City? How many people came into Venezuela from Mexico in that timeframe? 2 weeks of daily flights transporting people from Mexico to Venezuela? And thats not considering the people that might connect in the United States from Mexico? And Panama? And Colombia? Aruba?

I understand that the risks of Venezuela are minimal in contrast to say, United States, but to go on national television and say that Venezuela is secure from swine flu is just down right irresponsible in my book.

Emerson on Travelling (Self Reliance)


It is for want of self-culture that the idol of Traveling, the idol of Italy, of England, of Egypt, remains for all educated Americans. They who made England, Italy, or Greece venerable in the imagination, did so not by rambling round creation as a moth round a lamp, but by sticking fast where they were, like an axis of the earth. In manly hours we feel that duty is our place and that the merry men of circumstance should follow as they may. The soul is no traveler: the wise man stays at home with the soul, and when his necessities, his duties, on any occasion call him from his house, or into foreign lands, he is at home still and is not gadding abroad from himself, and shall make men sensible by the expression of his countenance that he goes, the missionary of wisdom and virtue, and visits cities and men like a sovereign and not like an interloper or a valet.

I have no churlish objection to the circumnavigation of the globe for the purposes of art, of study, and benevolence, so that the man is first domesticated, or does not go abroad with the hope of finding somewhat greater than he knows. He who travels to be amused or to get somewhat which he does not carry, travels away from himself, and grows old even in youth among old things. In Thebes, in Palmyra, his will and mind have become old and dilapidated as they. He carries ruins to ruins.

Traveling is a fool's paradise. We owe to our first journeys the discovery that place is nothing. At home I dream that at Naples, at Rome, I can be intoxicated with beauty and lose my sadness. I pack my trunk, embrace my friends, embark on the sea and at last wake up in Naples, and there beside me is the stern Fact, and sad self, unrelenting, identical, that I fled from. I seek the Vatican and the palaces. I affect to be intoxicated with sights and suggestions, but I am not intoxicated. My giant goes with me wherever I go.

3. But the rage of traveling is itself only a symptom of a deeper unsoundness affecting the whole intellectual action. The intellect is vagabond, and the universal system of education fosters restlessness. Our minds travel when our bodies are forced to stay at home. We imitate; and what is imitation but the traveling of the mind? Our houses are built with foreign taste; our shelves are garnished with foreign ornaments; our opinions, our tastes, our whole minds, lean, and follow the Past and the Distant, as the eyes of a maid follow her mistress. The soul created the arts wherever they have flourished. It was in his own mind that the artist sought the model. It was an application of his own thought to the thing to be done and the conditions to be observed. And why need we copy the Doric or the Gothic model? Beauty, convenience, grandeur of thought and quaint expression are as near to us as to any, and if the American artist will study with hope and love the precise thing to be done by him, considering the climate, the soil, the length of the day, the wants of the people, the habit and form of the government, he will create a house in which all these will find themselves fitted, and taste and sentiment will be satisfied also.

4.28.2009

On Imperialism





I make huge efforts not to laugh when I hear Venezuelan President Chavez attacking the United States on account that it represents the Empire. Any argument that this or that specific nation or company represents or is in fact the Empire, really reflects ignorance about history. But this naive ignorance is not as bad as when it is mixed with Marxist or Socialist arguments...

Not going into detail about Marxism and Socialist and its failed concepts in this post. Two really clever academics came up with a contemporary view of the empire and a view from Marxism. Their names Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt. Negri and Hardt wrote a book, title "Empire" and it has been deeply studied by constitutional academics in law schools around the world. Negri and Hardt have outlined the revised marxist concepts. Concepts with have failed throughout history in my personal opinion.

What is truly important is that two neo-marxists have seem to agree that

"Imperialism...is over."

Classical 19th and early 20th c. imperialism, as the extension of national sovereignty beyond the borders of the nation-state no longer organizes nor articulates the world economy. For Negri and Hardt imperialism has been replaced by imperium (Empire) or "a series of national or supranational organisms united under a single logic of rule."

Empire is a consequence of the globalization of Capital which they claim is unlike the global spread of capitalism which has characterized the previous 450 years of the world economy. As such, Empire, is a qualitative break with the past and all previous forms of hegemony.

Therefore to talk about Imperialism against a specific country, company or even product is really naive. What remains as the empire is the single logic of rule, and the rule seems to dictate towards the economic gain of the individual. For me money is empire, in the sense that everyone works for it and needs it.

Does Chavez know what is talking about? Would he give his personal wealth on currency just to abolish the empire? Would his Ministers and Chavista businessmen give away their money for socialist causes? I do not think so...

Perhaps the abolition of currency could entail the end the empire? If so...welcome to Utopia City, Population 1.