Resistencia no violenta a regímenes autoritarios de base democrática

El juez Ricardo Rojas (@rmrojas58) nos trae "Resistencia no violenta a regímenes autoritarios de base democrática", un libro oportuno ante las múltiples y crecientes manifestaciones de rechazo de los ciudadanos hacia sus gobiernos (Guatemala, Honduras, Venezuela, Brasil, México, Argentina, etc.) 

El juez Rojas construye sobre la tesis de Gene Sharp sobre cómo funcionan las revoluciones no violentas frente a dictaduras. Existen muchas similitudes entre regímenes netamente autoritarios (producto de dictadores, golpes de estado o guerras) y aquellos que se disfrazan por haber llegado al poder por la vía democrática.

Uno de los primeros puntos que aborda Ricardo es cuestionar la legitimidad de todo gobierno que surge de un proceso democrático.

"es importante investigar de qué se está hablando cuando se utiliza este vocablo [democracia], pues dentro de sus tantos significados se esconden formas de gobierno autoritarias."

Los gobernantes electos con aspiraciones autoritarias traicionan a sus electores y olvidan que son simples empleados. En lugar de cumplir con las funciones definidas por la ley, creen que recibieron un cheque en blanco para violar los derechos de las personas en nombre de su misma defensa. 

La democracia no es una panacea y dentro del sistema republicano juega un rol que no debe ser deificado. 

"la idea de una democracia directa, del 'Pueblo' tomando decisiones por sí mismo respecto de los asuntos públicos, es tan romántica como impracticable"

Las medidas no violentas son mecanismos para contener los abusos de los gobiernos sobre los derechos individuales y no tanto para el derrocamiento de los mismos. Es así que Ricardo sugiere prevenir que los gobernantes puedan acumular poder y llegar a abusar del mismo. Para ello nos recuerda la importancia de cuidar los principios republicanos básicos como el respeto a la constitución, la independencia de poderes, el fortalecimiento de instituciones, la libertad de prensa, la descentralización del poder, y el control electoral, entre otros.

A diferencia de muchos casos tradicionales de totalitarismo la adhesión es más compleja en los casos analizados por el juez Rojas. Por ejemplo a la oposición se le critica como opositores de la democracia y la voluntad de la mayoría. Amén de estas reacciones, la organización de sistemas de resistencia es posible aún cuando el origen del poder hayan sido elecciones.

En la última parte Ricardo abarca los requerimientos organizacionales y de planificación para que los esfuerzos no se dispersen o se esfumen producto del cansancio y el conformismo. Con una buena estrategia la aplicación de algunas de los casi 200 prácticas no violentas de resistencia de Sharp se hace de forma ordenada y con objetivos claros, lo que les da mayor fuerza y efectividad. 

Como complemento el libro del juez Rojas incluye el texto "De la dictadura a la democracia. Un sistema conceptual para la Liberación" de Gene Sharp.

Indiscutiblemente el aporte de Ricardo es relevante. Cuando la presentación del libro es censurada y acusada de promover el desorden se puede apreciar su valor. Como dijo Winston Churchill "¿Tienes enemigos? Bien. Eso significa que has defendido algo, alguna vez en tu vida."

. 

Unleash Your Inner Company

As times turn harder more and more people are considering starting their own businesses, Unleash Your Inner Company is a timely contribution and a required read for those serious about it.

In Unleash your Inner Company the successful entrepreneur John Chisholm (@johndchisholm) shares his experience to all those who want to be entrepreneurs as well.

John's book is easy to read, fun to follow and provides very useful training. He lays out a 10 step process to think, organize and make your ideas coherent. Beginning from the more simple but fundamental question of what you love and what you are good for, up to creating a full strategy with pricing, differentiation, escalation, financials, etc. The road map works like a blueprint, to build from the ground up, from the basics to the complex. In addition to the framework itself, John takes the reader by the hand clarifying his ideas with examples (some from his personal experience, others are made up yet very concise), suggesting exercises to put the concepts into practice, and FAQ's sections that expand each step further. At the end of each step a short recap becomes a cheat sheet of lessons learned.

In addition to his model, John introduces basic but powerful economic concepts to the entrepreneur. Sort of a reality check for the entrepreneur to be aware of non-business related challenges. Among these ideas we find the importance of institutions to create the environment for ideas to flourish, the damaging effects of centrally controlled regulations on innovation, and the ethics of entrepreneurship as a value creating endeavor.

In the last sections of the book, John adds some useful tools such as 101 accounting, and the relationship of his 10-step model and the popular Business Model Canvas.

John explains that he took the challenge of writing this book after he presented at TEDxUFM in 2011. It is a satisfaction to see an idea materialize. Bellow is an interview given during his visit to Universidad Francisco Marroquin for the event.

My rating 5 stars

Creative Schools

Sir Ken Robinson is one of the leading authorities in Education Reform. His TED talk about how schools kill creativity has been seen more than 30 million times becoming the most -viewed speaker on TED.com. His previous books are also best sellers and though provoking.

In Creative Schools, he makes a thorough diagnosis of the Education Crisis in the world and builds from success stories a proposal for School reform. 

Beginning with the needs of the world as the Industrial Revolution spanned attracting unskilled workers from the countryside to fulfill the jobs, to governments taking control all over the world, centrally planned educational systems are the norm today. 

Wherever you look, education is high on the agenda of governments around the globe. 

These days, governments scrutinize each other's education systems as earnestly as their defense policies.

On-going efforts to improve the system have failed again and again because they are more of the same without addressing the core of the problem. According to Robinson one of these key premises is that education is more than a linear system with simple causal relationships. 

The principle of linearity works well for manufacturing; it doesn't for people.

I said that education is best seen not as an industrial system but as an organic one. More specifically. it is what is know as a "complex, adaptive system"

The importance of education is indisputable yet Sir Ken Robinson makes it explicit to support his opinion about curriculum, assessment (evaluation), teachers and schools, kids and families.

The aims of education are to enable students to understand the world around them and the talents within them so that they can become fulfilled individuals and active compassionate citizens.

The four basic purposes of education: economic, cultural, social and personal

A Hayekian explanation to how the system actually works builds on multiple success stories. Diverse cases that go from his own experience, to Sergio Juárez Correa in Mexico, to Eric Mazur in Harvard, to Salman Khan and Khan Academy, to Sugata Mitra and the School in the Cloud, to Logan LaPlante and homeschooling, to cases in New Zealand, Argentina, and more, give hope to the feasibility of change. 

All living systems have a tendency to develop new characteristics in response to changing circumstances. They may have "emergent features," through "the interaction of small elements forming together to make a larger one. In education, there's an abundance of emergent features right now that are changing the context in which schools work and the cultures within them.

Robinson believes in local solutions; the subtitle of the book is The grassroots revolution that's transforming Education, Nonetheless he equals private initiatives with market solutions (commercial ventures are just one kind, many are non-profit or small local projects) and still hopes that policymakers will be able to lead the revolution. 

In some respects, mass education is, and always was, a process of social engineering. Sometimes the political intentions have been benign and sometimes not. 

Yet his invitation is to take a leading role in changing the status quo. We need multiple projects not just a substitute. Trying different alternatives may offer multiple solutions to the diverse needs of the people while helping future generations thrive in their live.

The revolution I'm advocating is based on different principles from those of the standard movement. It is based on a belief in the value of the individual, the right to self-determination, our potential to evolve and live a fulfilled life, and the importance of civic responsibility and respect for others.

Politicians and bureaucrats are interest groups who will not surrender power easily. Robinson's proposal is more pragmatic involving them in the solution and may be closer to achieve something than more radical solutions. I'm skeptical of anything that has government behind its name but hope that with Sir Ken Robinson's influence some changes will start to occur. 

My rating 4 stars.

Zen in the Martial Arts

This short book by Joe Hyams is a recollection of stories in his journey as martial artist. Hyams was a Hollywood reporter and writer who started in martial arts in his 30'. He had the opportunity to learn Kempo, Jeet Kune Do, Wing Chun, Hapkido, Aikido, from big masters like Bruce Lee, Ed Parker, Bong Soo Han, and Jim Lau.  

Zen in the Martial Arts is not a book about Martial Arts nor a book about Zen philosophy is a story of self discovery, and how their application can help control ones mind to achieve great results in life.

"this is a book from which readers may learn to apply the principles of Zen, as reflected in the martial arts, to their lives and thus open up a potential source of inner strength they may never have dreamt they possessed."

I stumble upon Hyams book looking for a quote by Bruce Lee who was one of the his master teachers. 

"You will never learn anything new unless your are ready to accept yourself with your limitations. You must accept the fact that you are capable, in some directions and limited in others, and you must develop your capabilities"

A conclusion of Zen in the Martial Arts is that you don't need Martial Arts to understand and appreciate Zen teachings about mind and self control, yet not because you practice Martial Arts you will learn Zen. Anyone can master the techniques yet just those willing to think, feel and appreciate the tradition will grasp the millennial teaching of the masters.

"it is possible to master the physical techniques of the martial arts without understanding or absorbing the spiritual and philosophical basis of the arts. On the other hand, it is also possible to apply the spiritual precepts of Zen in the martial arts without involving oneself in the arts."

Powerful inspiring pearls of wisdom like "Seize life at the moment", but not deep in philosophy.

After finishing the book I felt a urge to return to my practice with a different mindset.

My rating 3 stars.

Tao Te Ching

Lao Tsu (also know as Lao Tse or Laozi) was a Chinese philosopher during the 6th Century B.C. Despite some controversy over his existence, his contribution to the Chinese and World Philosophy is undeniable.

The Tao Te Ching, also know as Daodejin, is a book of 81 chapters organized in two books. The name approximate translation is "The Classic of the Virtuous Way". Next to the Bible it is the most translated work of literature. Tao Te Ching is not free of polemic. It is know from copies and chronicles of later writers, and biographers, who tell different stories or arrange the chapters differently. There is even a relevant debate about his influence over Confucius.  Nonetheless this book is a masterpiece of world literature. 

Valuable teachings from The Tao Te Ching are relevant personally, as well as for governments and leaders.

Personally I found lessons of austerity and frugality very though provoking.

But I have three precious things which I prize and hold fast. The first is gentleness; the second is economy; and the third is shrinking from taking precedence of others.

It is better to leave a vessel unfilled, than to attempt to carry it when it is full. If you keep feeling a point that has been sharpened, the point cannot long preserve its sharpness. When gold and jade fill the hall, their possessor cannot keep them safe. When wealth and honours lead to arrogancy, this brings its evil on itself. When the work is done, and one's name is becoming distinguished, to withdraw into obscurity is the way of Heaven.

The highest excellence is like (that of) water. The excellence of water appears in its benefiting all things, and in its occupying, without striving (to the contrary), the low place which all men dislike. Hence (its way) is near to (that of) the Tao.

The analogy with water was popularized by Bruce Lee

Another area of wisdom refers to how the world works and evolves. Similar to much later teachings of Michael Polanyi, F.A. Hayek or the different schools of System Dynamics, Lao Tzu explains the value of spontaneous order when he explains that the Tao precedes even the Gods because the constant is change.

The Tao that can be described is not the enduring and unchanging Tao. 

The work is done, but how no one can see; 'Tis this that makes the power not cease to be.

Movement is a necessary condition for change. Let movement go on, and the condition of rest will gradually arise.

However the key lessons relates to government are as relevant today as in the Ancient times. No wonder why Murray Rothbard considered Lao Tzu the first

libertarian. 

Governing a great state is like cooking small fish. 

Therefore a sage has said, 'I will do nothing (of purpose), and the people will be transformed of themselves; I will be fond of keeping still, and the people will of themselves become correct. I will take no trouble about it, and the people will of themselves become rich; I will manifest no ambition, and the people will of themselves attain to the primitive simplicity.'

Therefore he who would administer the kingdom, honouring it as he honours his own person, may be employed to govern it, and he who would administer it with the love which he bears to his own person may be entrusted with it.

The people suffer from famine because of the multitude of taxes consumed by their superiors. It is through this that they suffer famine. The people are difficult to govern because of the (excessive) agency of their superiors (in governing them). It is through this that they are difficult to govern.

The sage does not accumulate (for himself). The more that he expends for others, the more does he possess of his own; the more that he gives to others, the more does he have himself.

A book worth reading and discussion in a Socratic Dialogue.

My rating four stars.

Symposium room at
Universidad Francisco Marroquín

Fundamentos de la Moral (The foundations of Morality)

The Foundation of Morality (Spanish edition) is a work on Ethics by Henry Hazlitt, better know by his book Economics in One Lesson. This book is a critique to different Ethics schools and the proposal of his system called Cooperatism.

Hazlitt analyses different areas of human life as well as moral schools usually contrasting opposing theories with his personal contribution. His key point is that cooperation is the solution that preserves the interests of the individual and flourishes the society. For Hazlitt cooperation achieves the best for the individual, hence it is in his own interest to cooperate with others. 

social cooperation is the common means by which we all forward each other's purposes as an indirect means of forwarding our own, and help each other to achieve our individual and separate goals and to "maximize" our individual values

Since Hazlitt aims the benefits in terms of the long run, his system gives priority to general rules and not ad-hoc solutions to specific instances. The idea is to judge an action based on its effects in the future. He does not pretend to foresee detail consequences but again general benefits for the individual and the society. The creation of the moral code is rational process that is adaptive and evolutionary following Frederick A. Hayek.

It is no less silly, and far more dangerous, to try to do the same with established moral codes which, like languages, are the product of immemorial social evolution. The improvement or perfection of moral codes, like the improvement or perfection of languages, is to be achieved by piecemeal reforms.

Hazlitt's theory is a form of utilitarianism, indeed some people frame it into rules-utilitarianism of David Hume, the British Utilitarianist he most admires. As utilitarianist, Hazlitt defines morality based on the results.

Is the moral philosophy advocated in these pages "utilitarian" or not? In the sense that all rules of conduct must be judged by their tendency to lead to desirable rather than undesirable social results, any rational ethics whatever must be utilitarian

However he distances from other forms of utilitarianism specially that of Jeremy Bentham because they preserve the apparent dichotomy between the individual and society. Hazlitt's system bridges the distance through Social Cooperation, a concept develop at large by his teacher and friend Ludwing Von Mises.

In brief, each of us, in pursuing his self-interest, finds that he can do it most effectively through social cooperation. The belief that there is a basic conflict between the interests of the individual and the interests of society is untenable. Society is only another name for the combination of individuals for purposeful cooperation.

He makes a lot of parallels between Economics and Morality because the subject of both sciences is the Human Action.

It is commonly assumed that there is little relation between the ethical and the economic point of view, or between Ethics and Economics. But they are, in fact, intimately related. Both are concerned with human action, human conduct, human decision, human choice.

In ethics we are dealing with human action, with human purposes, with human wishes and desires, with human choices and preferences, with the conscious use of means to attain chosen ends. Ethics is not a branch of physics, and the methods appropriate to it are not the experimental, statistical, and empiric methods appropriate to physics. Ethics is sui generic, with methods peculiarly its own. But it is, among other things, based on "praxeology," 

Economics is concerned with the actual valuations that people make; ethics with the valuations they would make if they always had benevolence and foresight and wisdom. It is the function of the ethical philosopher to determine what some of these valuations would be.

Another subject that Hazlitt addresses is the limits of responsibility and duty. He disagrees with the universal view of an universal responsibility to humanity. For him ones responsibility is limited to those closer to oneself. However he sees that in the degree that we all act ethically the circles of responsibility intersect and expand, reaching the whole humanity. This point of view again builds on economics and limited resources. Trying to fix all humanity problems is overwhelming because none has the capacity to do it. However social cooperation is a multiplier of human interactions. By acting morally one gets the personal benefits (a more desired situation than before), helps others do the same, raises the average of standard of morality, and expands the circles of influence.

For the best way to promote this maximum general happiness may be for each individual to cooperate with, and perform his duties toward, his immediate family, neighbors, and associates.

Hazlitt critique to flaw moral theories that support Socialistic systems and his support to freedom and a Capitalism are as relevant today as they were almost a century ago. Despite he was a self-taught economist and philosopher his contribution is no less important than his academic peers. This is a book I need to read again and dig deeper to get all its wisdom. Additional readings of the works he builds on and critiques is also required to appreciate his full value.

My rating 5 out of 5 stars.

Anthem

Anthem is a short dystropian book by Ayn Rand written in 1937-38, during a break from writing "The Fountainhead", portraits a world so lost into a Collectivist utopia that the world "I" has disappeared from  language.

Probably Rand wrote this book as a warning after seeing the deterioration of the foundation of the American Society (Constitution) after the first term of Franklin Roosevelth. According to Amity Shlaes in her book "The Forgotten Man" in the 20's a group of intellectuals, artists, and businessmen became enchanted by the Soviet Revolution. People like Rex Tugwell, Paul Douglas and Sturart Chase among others who were influential in the conceptualization and execution of "The New Deal". The reelection of Roosevelth and the popular support to his recovery programs seemed to be a trigger for Rand to halt Fountainhead and write Anthem. 

The novel describes a restless hero who slowly has rebelled against a systems that decides everything for the people in the name of the will "of our brothers, The State". Although the description of this world is fiction, it is also a grotesque representation of realities and wishes of actual intellectuals and politicians. In Rand's time it was the Soviets and the Nazis, today we know of countries like North Korea where the State chooses even your hair style. The educational systems in most of the countries serve the needs of society and not the individual. Defenders, such as Free Range Kids, of the right of parents to raise their children against the intervention of the state (i.e. Child Protective Services) We read about philosophers like Adam Swift who advocate for removing children from their parents because parenthood is accidental and children belong to society, or news reporter Melissa Harris-Perry who defended the same idea in public TV.

Overall the hero free himself from the oppression of the system and along his beloved partner start a new settlement that defies the City.

"And the day will come when I shall break all the chains of the earth, and raze the cities of the enslaved, and my home will become the capital of the world where each man will be free to exist for his own sake."

Rand explains how the individual broke the slavery chains from gods, from kings, from race but ended surrendering to the collective, to the WE. Overall all forms of dominance people have suffer are to other people. Defiant contenders overtaking incumbents.

"Freedom he ask, from what? There is nothing to take a man's freedom away from him, save other men. To be free, a man must be free of his brothers. That is freedom. That and nothing else."

Some issues can raise philosophical debate under Rand's Objectivism. For instance the hero reverse engineer a light bulb, isn't it a violation of Intellectual Property that she advocates? The hero builds a new city based on the individual, yet he is the one leading and deciding who comes in and who stays out. His voice is triumphant but also authoritarian. He doesn't address how it would become sustainable, Can such authority based on the I be even more dangerous when people surrender their will to think?

In the age of dystropias like Hunger Games, Gone, The Maze Runner, The Giver, Divergent, etc Anthem can be a quick read for teens and young adults to make them think about how far can collectivist minds can go.

Yet some more "meat" in the novel would have made it more appealing. Despite the 6.2 million sold copies I wonder if a longer more elaborated plot would make it more appealing.

My rating 4 out of 5 stars.