Thomas Jefferson - Sobre las instituciones bancarias

NOTA: Haz click en la imagen para verla a su máximo tamaño, ¡y comparte tanto como puedas!

Thomas Jefferson:

Tercer presidente de los Estados Unidos de América (Shadwell, Virginia, 1743 - Monticello, Virginia, 1826). Thomas Jefferson pertenecía a la aristocracia de grandes hacendados del Sur, posición que había completado haciéndose abogado. Sus inquietudes intelectuales le acercaron a la filosofía de las Luces y a las ideas liberales, haciéndole abandonar la religión.


Empezó a participar en la política de Virginia desde 1769, defendiendo la tolerancia religiosa y una enseñanza pública igualitaria. Cuando se agravó el conflicto entre Gran Bretaña y sus trece colonias norteamericanas, Jefferson defendió los derechos de éstas, publicando un ensayo de corte radical (Breve análisis de los derechos de la América británica, 1774).

Durante la siguiente Guerra de Independencia, Thomas Jefferson fue elegido delegado de Virginia en la Convención continental de Filadelfia (1775), donde se distinguió como orador y como autor de declaraciones políticas. Redactó el borrador de laDeclaración de Independencia (1776), donde plasmó las ideas de Locke; justificó la rebelión por las transgresiones del rey Jorge III contra los derechos reconocidos a los ciudadanos por la constitución no escrita de Gran Bretaña; su defensa de la democracia, de la igualdad, del derecho de los pueblos a disponer de ellos mismos y del derecho natural de los hombres «a la vida, la libertad y la búsqueda de la felicidad» han marcado la historia posterior de los Estados Unidos.

Otro documento fundamental del que fue inspirador fue la Ordenanza del Noroeste (1787): en ella se regulaba la forma de expansión de las trece colonias originarias hacia los amplios territorios por colonizar en el Oeste, estableciendo en ellos gobernadores nombrados por el Congreso hasta que alcanzaran entidad demográfica suficiente para ser admitidos como Estados de la Unión.

Thomas Jefferson fue gobernador de Virginia en 1779-81. Luego fue miembro del Congreso, defendiendo sin éxito la abolición de la esclavitud. Como embajador de Estados Unidos en París (1785-89) aprovechó su experiencia para asesorar al primer gobierno surgido de la Revolución francesa (1789). Más tarde fue nombrado por Washington primer secretario de Estado (ministro de Asuntos Exteriores) de Estados Unidos (1790-93).

Desde esa época se enfrentó al secretario del Tesoro, Hamilton, perfilando el primer sistema bipartidista americano: Hamilton, líder de los «federalistas centralistas» o simplemente «federalistas» (antecedente ideológico del Partido Republicano), proponía reforzar el poder del gobierno federal al servicio de la expansión de la Unión y de la hegemonía de los capitalistas del Norte; Jefferson, dirigente de los «federalistas republicanos» o simplemente «republicanos» (precursores del Partido Demócrata), defendía la autonomía de los Estados, especialmente para proteger los intereses del Sur, y un modelo democrático de pequeños propietarios independientes.

En 1796 perdió Thomas Jefferson las elecciones presidenciales frente al federalista John Adams, por lo que, en virtud de una disposición constitucional luego derogada, se convirtió en vicepresidente como segundo candidato más votado (1797-1801). Finalmente, ganó las elecciones en 1800 y 1804, por lo que fue presidente entre 1801 y 1809.

Lo más relevante de sus dos mandatos fue la consolidación de un reparto de funciones entre los poderes constitucionales, según el cual el gobierno federal se encargaría de la defensa y la política exterior, dejando a los Estados una amplia autonomía política interior; con ello llevó a la práctica sus convicciones filosóficas sobre la necesidad de limitar al poder para salvaguardar la libertad.

Jefferson también favoreció la futura expansión de los Estados Unidos, al adquirir a Francia el extenso territorio de Luisiana (1803) y potenciar las exploraciones hacia el oeste de Lewis y Clark (1804-06). Siguiendo el ejemplo de Washington, no se presentó a una tercera reelección (en 1808 se impuso el también republicano Madison), se retiró a cultivar sus múltiples aficiones intelectuales (1809) y fundó la Universidad de Virginia (1819).

Fuente de la Biografía:

http://www.biografiasyvidas.com/biografia/j/jefferson.htm

Fuentes de las imagen:

http://ramonramon.org/blog/2010/05/29/%C2%BFpor-que-no-se-escucha-a-jefferson/

Gabriel Satti Bouzas en este enlace.

http://r3tr0sp3ct1v0.blogspot.com/2009/04/cita.html

http://el-liberalismo.com/politica/las-hipotecas-estrangulan-la-economia-familiar

http://marioalfer.blogspot.com/2010/02/hoy-palabras-de-otro.html

Leer más»

Fascism For Dummies

Artículo mencionado en este vídeo.

Fuentes:

http://www.infowars.com/fascism-for-dummies/

http://www.dollarvigilante.com/blog/2011/12/15/fascism-for-dummies.html

Información:

Fascism For Dummies

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2011 AT 6:40PM

[Editor's Note: The following article is from TDV Correspondent Pete Kofod.  Pete's bio appears at the end of the article]

Here at TDV fascism is frequently referred to as the increasingly prevalent form of government in the West.  We recognize that this conjures strong emotions and we often get a few angry emails voicing displeasure with our characterization of their homeland. We understand that the word fascism is an emotionally charged word and we do not use it lightly.

We recognize, however, that we have never taken the time to define it completely nor place it within the context of our communications (although Jeff did compare the USA to the dictionary definition of "fascism" in "The Fasco-Communist Police State of America").  As such, we have fallen victim to one of our own cardinal sins; letting somebody else control the thoughts by controlling the definition of the words used to define those thoughts.  To make matters worse, by default, we have relegated the responsibility of defining those words to two of the most criminally complicit estates in our society, namely the educational system and mass media.  It is time to address this oversight.

THE ETYMOLOGY OF "FASCISM"

The word fascism is rooted in the Latin word fasces, a Roman object made of wooden rods tightly bound by red, overlapping straps.  At the top, or occasionally in the middle, of the fasces was an axe head.  The bound wooden rods represented strength through unity and the axe represented the means by which authority was exerted by the unified entity.  In addition to being used as a weapon by Roman authorities, the fasces was a key symbol on government buildings of the Roman empire.  The symbolism of the fasces is significant.  The wooden rod represents the weak individual whose sole contribution is to provide strength to the unified object, in this case the State.  The axe head, unsurprisingly, represents the force with which the State will ensure its survival.

Fascism is referred to as an ideology with numerous characteristics, the most common being fervent nationalism, virtually unlimited central authority, militarism, and state control of production.  While those traits are almost universally present in fascist run societies, we take the position that fascism in, in fact, not an ideology at all.  Merriam-Webster defines ideology as the “visionary theorizing of a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture.”

Mussolini

We contend that the objective of fascism is to ensure the survival and further the influence of the State.  As Benito Mussolini famously stated, “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”  Fascism holds self-preservation of the State as the supreme objective, regardless of method.  It is therefore difficult to envision fascism as an ideology any more than a pride of lions being governed by an ideology.  Fascism is an observed organizational structure in which the State exerts unlimited and arbitrary power over all its subjects merely for its own survival.

THE CORE CHARACTERISTICS OF FASCISM

While we contend that fascism is without principles, that is not to say that it does not have core characteristics.  Rather than representing a platform of principles from which to rule, however, these characteristics represents processes and tools that empower the State apparatus.  As times and conditions change, a fascist State will shift message, priorities and effort, all for the purpose of self-preservation.  At times the State will appear pro-market, other times it will claim national exigencies demand that it assume control of production in the economy.  Commonly observed traits, however, include:

Nominal or no limit on the power of the State.  Whether explicit or de facto, when the State ceases to recognize limits on its authority, it is displaying a core characteristic of fascism.  This is often seen in the broad powers that are granted to the law enforcement, military and the intelligence apparatus.  As a related aside, a common observation in fascist regimes is that law enforcement and military cease to be viewed as members of the community in which they serve.  Their encroaching and increasingly heavy handed tactics become the source of discontent  among the people which in turn results in increasingly hysterical propaganda from the State.

Significant spending on national defense.  Regardless of the financial conditions of the State and its subjects, military spending is virtually unaffected by financial stress occurring in other segments of the economy.  The State recognizes that political power is meaningless without the force to back it.  Money goes to salaries, weapons, research and various military adventures.  In Germany and Italy in the 1930s, significant production and economic benefit was bestowed upon the military and the military industry.  This is still the case in some countries today.

Key segments of the economy are granted cartel status by the State.  Industries including agriculture, health care, banking, energy and manufacturing find themselves submitting to the State’s plan for production or being run out of business.  In a fascist regime, the State typically does not actually seek to run the enterprise, they merely dictate the conditions and stipulations under which producers must operate.

A final note on fascism.  It is commonly held that fascism is a right-wing form of government.  We hold that the differentiation between left and right in this context is completely meaningless.  North Korea and the former Soviet Union certainly can be characterized as fascist.  The key characteristic is a high degree of force and deceit that the State deploys in self preservation.

This brief article is far from an exhaustive study on the matter of fascism.  Lew Rockwell of the Mises Institute and Richard Maybury, author of the Uncle Eric series of books have dedicated many years of academic research to this topic.  Much of what we have captured in this short primer is a result of their pioneering work.  For those interested in further study of fascism, its history and how it manifests today, we encourage you to seek the works by these two remarkable men.  See "The Fascist Threat" by Lew Rockwell and the Uncle Eric books here.

For recent interviews with Lew Rockwell, Richard Maybury and Pete Kofod onAnarchast, click on their names.

Pete Kofod

Pete Kofod is the founder and president of Datasages, a technology services firm that offers cloud computing and strategic technology services to various private organizations.  Pete is a property owner at Doug's Gulch in Argentina and enjoys a variety of outdoor activities including tennis, skydiving and hiking.  His most recent adventure is pursuing his private pilot's license.  Pete is married and home schools his two children.

Jeff Berwick | 12 Comments | Share Article

Email Article

Post a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »

Author:  

Author Email (optional):

Author URL (optional):

Post:

↓ | ↑

All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.

Comment Moderation Enabled
Your comment will not appear until it has been cleared by a website editor.

 Notify me of follow-up comments via email.

    

Leer más»

The Rise of the Praetorian Class

NOTA: El artículo mencionado en el vídeo se encuentra en estos enlaces:

http://www.infowars.com/fascism-for-dummies/

http://www.dollarvigilante.com/blog/2011/12/15/fascism-for-dummies.html

Enlace a los vídeos:

The Rise of the Praetorian Class 1/2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6o-6nUZMDA

The Rise of the Praetorian Class 2/2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMQ9tztYenM

Texto adjunto:

Subido por TheAlexJonesChannel en 23/01/2012

On this Monday January 23, 2012 broadcast of the Nightly News Alex Jones Interviews

Pete Kofod about The Rise of the Praetorian Class.

http://www.caseyresearch.com/
http://lewrockwell.com/orig12/kofod2.1.1.html
http://www.infowars.com/
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/

Much attention has been paid to the "disappearing middle class" and the "vanishing American Dream." While the observations are largely accurate, they are also misleading. The traditional three-tier model of the upper, middle and lower class broadly categorizes people according to income and net worth. One significant problem with this model is that membership in any particular class is very much in the eye of the beholder. One man's "scraping by" is another man's "opulent living." This subjective and arbitrary grouping and boundary assessment inevitably gives rise to the simmering class warfare that is starting to rear its ugly head in many Western countries. Such categorization is therefore meaningless at best, if not outright deceptive as it conflates a variety of economic actors.

Categoría:

Gente y blogs

Etiquetas:

• pete
 
• kofod
 
• casey
 
• research
 
• lewrockwell
 
• rise
 
• of
 
• the
 
• praetorian
 
• class
• alex
 
• jones
 
• infowars
 
• nightly
 
• news

Licencia:

Licencia estándar de YouTube

Leer más»