I Need Dick Before Bed

Simone Weil between pacifism and nonviolence (from "without violence")

As Hannah Arendt, Simone Weil drew from the political lifeblood of his thinking, and strive for a Marxist anarchist libertarian footprint and a strong ethical inspiration.

The first phase of the thought of Weil, complex and often contradictory, is marked by the predominance of political and social issues in 1934 but resigned to practice any form of political activity aimed at a mystical-religious reflection with strong traits pessimistic. Of Jewish origin, converted to Catholicism ideally, "par excellence the religion of slaves, without ever being baptized.

thought and life of Simone Weil (1909-1943) are based on the greatest moral rigor and consistency in search of a difficult truth, least religious, "insisted that there was no inconsistency between the minimum their convictions and the life "[S. Pétrement, Life of Simone Weil , p. 65].

Yet Weil, pacifist, he participated briefly in the English Civil War in the summer of 1936. Pacifism heard, then?

If in the last years of his life will support the French Resistance militating in the organization De Gaulle, still a student Simone Weil was a pacifist "pure". He joined in 1927 to the small group Volonté de Paix and after the Ligue des droits de l'homme . At that time she had been for the crucial influence of the pacifist Alain (Emile Auguste Chartier), his professor of philosophy in the preparation classes at the Ecole Normale Supérieure.

Politically, Simone Weil was close to syndicalism. The Marxist concept of class struggle complicated his views on nonviolence. Reflections on the war in of 1933 writes: "Until the period following the last war, the revolutionary movement in its various forms, had nothing in common with the pacifism [...]. It is clear that the Marxist tradition has not, as regards the war, or device, or clarity. One point at least was common to all theories, namely the categorical refusal to condemn the war as such. Marxists, especially Lenin and Kautsky, paraphrased welcomes the affirmation of Clausewitz, that war would only continue the policy of peace time, but by other means. The conclusion was that a war must be judged not by the violence of the means employed, but by the objectives pursued by these means [ Reflections on the war in On War, p. 29].

But, as Gandhi also thought about the relationship means-ends, to try to "evaluate every war from the purposes and not by the nature of the means" is "the worst way possible," although "this does not mean that in general it is better to condemn the use of violence, like the pure pacifists, war is good in every age a particular species of violence which we must study the mechanism before making any judgment [ there , p. 31].

Here Simone Weil plays the card of Marxist materialism in an original way: "The materialist method is to first examine taking into account any fact much of the human consequences necessarily implied that the means put in the game of the purposes. You can not solve, nor pose a problem on the war without having firstly removed the mechanism of military struggle, ie without analyzing the social relations that it implies certain technical conditions, economic and social. [...] And the war proves to be ultimately a war waged by all the state apparatus and the larger states against all the able-bodied men "[ there , p. 32].

Thus the Weil pacifist first way, which is still a "pure pacifist."

Then comes the brief participation in the English Civil War. In his letter to Georges Bernanos Simone Weil writes: "In July 1936 I was in Paris. I do not like war, but in war, what has always made me more horror is the condition of those who are in the backline. When I realized that despite my efforts, I could not help morally participate in this war, that is to wish every day, every hour, the victory of some, the defeat of others, I said that Paris was to me the backline, and I took the train to Barcelona with the intention to enlist. It was the beginning of August 1936 [Letter to Georges Bernanos in On War, p. 50].

The reasoning that leads her to cross the border is so clear and brave and the behavior that follows is anything but adversarial.

moral participation from behind the scenes is not ethically acceptable, "Simon thought that when we can no longer prevent a war, we must bear their share in this calamity with the group to which he belongs" [S. Pétrement, Life of Simone Weil , p. 65].

Staying on the sidelines is not possible for his particular psychological tendency to compassion. Simone de Beauvoir reminds her: "A great famine had recently ravaged China and I was told that, in learning this news broke out into sobs [ there , p. 75]. And his friend and biographer Simon Pétrement this self-assessment report to Simon, "My imagination always runs in a very painful way for me. The thought of the suffering of the dangers which do not participate fills me with horror, pity, shame and remorse, a mix that I take away all freedom of spirit, only the perception of reality frees me from everything "[ therein].

to perceive the reality of the English Civil War, Simone Weil crossed the English border on August 8, 1936 in Port-Bou.

It integrates a small international group where some knowledge of French. They teach her to handle weapons. You will immediately notice its lack of ability: "Comrades, exercise, avoid going into the path of his gun" [ therein, p. 365].

On 17 August, after the Franco's air force dropped a small bomb on the ground, "Suddenly I understand that one goes in shipment [...] So, I very excited (I can not evaluate the usefulness of the thing and I know that if we take, we shoot). " Would later write: "The first and only time I was scared during his stay in Pina [ therein].

There is no doubt that wants to fight, despite the objections of the delegates who commanded the group: "Stubborn, states that came to Spain as a tourist or an observer, but to fight and promises to honor his place in the ranks of the group '[ therein, p. 366].

While fellow is coming to a house that must be made clear, she sort of waiting with a German cook named: "He obviously afraid. Not me. But like everything around me, there is intense! War with no prisoners. If you're caught it and shot. " And yet, with a peace of mind even more if possible, "aerial reconnaissance. Hide. [...] I do I lie back, look at the leaves, the blue sky. Beautiful day. If they catch me, kill me ... But it is fair. Our people paid enough blood. They are morally complicit. "

The next day, it burns badly by putting one foot in a pan filled with boiling oil placed at ground level and do not see the fire from above. Did not see it because of its strong myopia. The burn is severe and the doctor father, meanwhile arrived in Spain with his wife, after much persuasion fails to persuade her to return to France for treatment.

Simone Weil never return to Spain. In the letter to Bernanos explains why: "I left Spain in spite of myself and with the intent to return, later, I have not done voluntarily, nothing. I did not feel any inner need to participate in a war that was not, as seemed to me at first, a war of starving peasants against the landowners and clergy accomplice of the owners, but a war between Russia, Germany and Italy "[Letter to Georges Bernanos in On War, p. 50].

thus justifying French non-intervention on the side of the Republicans in the English Civil War: " Even when I was in Aragon and Catalonia, in the midst of the climate of struggle between militants who were unable to find sufficiently severe to qualify the policy of Blum [ the chairman of the French Socialist], I approve of this policy. The point is that I refuse, on my behalf, deliberately to sacrifice the peace, even if it comes to saving a revolutionary people threatened with extermination [ not general surgery, Reflections on the war in , cit., P . 45] .

come to a point consider the hegemony of Europe Hitler's Germany is a lesser evil of war.

But after the invasion of Czechoslovakia changed his mind and began to reproach the former pacifism, now called a "criminal mistake".

In Simone Weil pacifism and rejection of violence do not overlap. Indeed, it is just after the abandonment of its pacifist positions in the strict sense that Weil intensified reflection on nonviolence.

In Notebooks, written mostly between 1941 and 1942 and published posthumously, is a clear ethical program, "Strive to replace more and more in the world non-violence effective violence. Non-violence is good only if effective. Strive to become likely to be non-violent. "

Texts cited:

JM Muller, The need for nonviolence, EGA, Torino 1994;

S. Pétrement, Life of Simone Weil , Adelphi, Milano 1994;

S. Weil, On the war, publishing practices, Parma 1988.

(Taken from Without Violence. Ideas and stories of peace movements, by Edward Acotto, "Days of History" No 38, The Unit, 2004)

Closets Para The Sims

Pacifism skeptical of Sir Bertrand Russell (from "without violence")

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) is one of the greatest philosophers of the twentieth century. In addition to his books on mathematical logic and philosophy, many are those of policy and ethics. The world wars of the twentieth century mark the test of her pacifism: Russell was the first non-interventionist war but not the second. It seemed in fact that pacifism, even in its radical Gandhi, could not succeed against the Nazis, because "the power [of nonviolence] depends on the presence of certain virtues in those against which is used. "

However, after World War II was one of the greatest entertainers of initiatives for peace and nuclear disarmament.

The great British philosopher Bertrand Russell pacifist suddenly discovered in 1901 at the age of 29 years. He had a sudden crisis that could be called "mysticism", during an episode of acute suffering wife of the philosopher Whitehead: "Within five minutes I passed through the mind thoughts such as: the loneliness of the human soul is unendurable; nothing can penetrate it except the most intense form of that kind of love preached by the great mystics, all that does not arise from this impulse is harmful or at least unnecessary, it follows that war is a mistake, that the education you receive in the major college English is abominable, that the use of force is regrettable [...]. At the end of those five minutes I had become a completely different person. For a while I was dominated by a sort of mystical illumination "[ Bertrand Russell's autobiography, I, pp. 239-240].

Nonviolence was not so ingrained, it is instead the case of other peace activists (one for all: Simone Weil), nor was part of the his education, as Russell was an aristocrat of liberal ideas but also nourished by love of country.

Besides his position on pacifism will change with changing historical conditions, highlighting an ethical pragmatism irreconcilable with the religious or radical pacifism with Gandhian nonviolence.

During the First World War, Russell was committed to fund the cause of peace, fighting for the non-intervention: "It seemed impossible that the European nations commit the madness to start a war, but I had no doubt that if the War broke out he really was, England would have been dragged to participate. I felt however, with all your soul, that our country should remain neutral and thus caused many professors and members of the various colleges to make a declaration of principle which was published in the Manchester Guardian . The day of our entry into the war almost all changed their minds "[ there , II, p. 11].

Membership of Russell's pacifism is not mediated by philosophical considerations, is rather a spontaneous attitude, emotional. Neither pacifism tactical or strategic, short, or pacifism "of conviction."

Russell would later admit that adherence to pacifism not was immune from his natural skepticism: "I imagined now be liberal, socialist hours, Pacific time, but in the deepest sense I have never been neither one thing nor the other nor the other. Ever the skeptical mind, when I wanted more silent, he murmured his doubts, he cut off the easy enthusiasm of others and transported me into a desolate loneliness "[ there , p. 51].

While working with associations democratic pacifist, he realizes that the consent to the war is broader and more spontaneous than they could imagine: "I, like almost all anti-war, I always naively thought that wars were imposed by despotic and Machiavellian governments reluctant to populations. [...] The first days of war were the most shocking for me. My closest friends, such as, for example, Whitehead, proved interventionists believe [there , pp. 12-13].

The war reserve love surprises and provides a starting point for considerations shiny and disconsolate about human nature: "Until then I had thought that people in general, he loved money more than anything else, I realized that they loved even more destruction. I imagined that intellectuals especially loved the truth, but here again I found that those who preferred the truth were known to less than ten percent [ there , p. 15].

Col pressure of events the specific commitment of Russell is becoming more determined and courageous.

With the introduction of conscription has been fighting full-time for the defense of conscientious objectors, who face the death penalty.

holds public lectures: "I spent three weeks in the mining districts of Wales [...] None of the meetings was always stopped and found that the majority, the public was not hostile, not at all: as long as I just speaking areas industry. In London, things went differently [ there , p. 28].

In 1916 he was taken off the job at Trinity College, Cambridge for his unpopular pacifist commitment to the academic authorities and colleagues.

also undergoes an absurd decision of the authorities: he was prohibited from visiting the industrial and coastal areas of the country, fearing that could make recommendations to the enemy submarines!

Finally, in May 1918, was imprisoned for six months to get released on a small pacifist magazine news of military already relatively public.

Actually Russell is gradually convinced of the ineffectiveness, given the state of any practical action to sign peace, "On the other hand, it was useful or not the action had begun, I was not able to stop just when it seemed he could forced to abandon the work for fear of the consequences.

The fact remains that just as I drove in prison, I was convinced that everything we were trying to do was useless, "[there , p. 44].

The outbreak of World War II saw a Russell convinced of the need to actively resist, with arms, Nazi barbarity: "I was able imagine with acquiescence, albeit reluctant, the possibility of a rule of the Kaiser's Germany, believing that, though he could be a calamity, would not be a bad thing as bad as a world war with all its consequences. Ben else was Hitler's Germany. I felt an indescribable loathing for the Nazis: cruel, fanatic and stupid. I was hateful, no less morally and intellectually. Although I still cling to my pacifist convictions, I did more and more difficult, and when, in 1940, weighed the threat of an invasion on England, I realized that throughout the first war I had never seriously contemplated the possibility of a total defeat . This idea I was unbearable and finally, in all conscience, I decided it was my duty to support all that seemed necessary to achieve victory, as there are rarely as they were painful and the likely consequences of World War II "[ therein, pp. 338-339].

pacifism A "spontaneous" can easily fail in the face of an opponent 'exceptional' as fascism, an example of violence without redemption.

Severus and then becomes almost a caricature of the proceedings on the Gandhian nonviolence Russell: "I believe however that the method of resistance passive or, saying better, the resistance without violence, could have a broader scope than it turned out the light of the facts.

certainly has great power in India, against the British, Gandhi brought a triumph. But the strength of it depends on the presence of certain virtues in those against whom it is used. When the Indians they lay on the railroad tracks challenging the authorities to crush them under trains, the British left off from committing a similar cruelty. The Nazis but had no scruples in analogous situations. The doctrine preached by Tolstoy so persuasive, namely that those in power can be reclaimed if you are morally opposed a passive resistance, was obviously of no value in Germany after 1933 "[ there , II, p. 340].

obscured only by a sincere desire not to seem self-contradictory, Russell says finally: "I never had absolute faith in the idea of \u200b\u200bpassive resistance, and will not ever totally rinnegai. But in practice the difference between the opposition to World War I and the consensus was the second big enough not to let see the considerable degree of theoretical coherence that actually existed between [my] two attitudes [ there , II p . 341].

Di Faced with these statements, the nature of pacifism skeptic Bertrand Russell appears quite clearly and the limitations of a policy may not sufficiently theorized in terms of ethical and philosophical.

However, after the Second World War, Russell continued to strive admirably to the cause of peace and justice by establishing the so-called Russell Tribunal, composed of independent persons with the task of denouncing the crimes of war silenced by the media .

In the last years of his life, individually and through Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation , Russell has "devoted more time and thoughts to Vietnam War [ there , III, p. 289].

It is also very much committed to avoid the risk of nuclear war, writing appeals to heads of state of the superpowers: in 1955, among other things, was the initiator of the so-called Russell-Einstein Manifesto against the use of nuclear weapons.

Texts cited:

B. Russell, Bertrand Russell's autobiography , Longanesi, Milano 1969.

(Taken from Without Violence. Ideas and stories of the movement Peace, edited by Edward Acotto, "Days of History" No 38, The Unit, 2004)

Elimination Period Vs Waiting Period

The sick planet, Underworld and Space 1999 (my note of 2007)

"In 1971 Debord writes an essay, The sick planet, which seems to be written today. Talk of pollution such as material production and the the same time spectacular (ideological), and pollution as something as a discourse on the thing.

Twenty years later, Don DeLillo has written his masterpiece, Underworld that features an expert on disposal of radioactive waste also, and as common thread to bind together the many stories But from the centrifugal rather than a non-existent compared to the center, the history of baseball ... the historic game, perfect emblem of ideological nothing that America West had already fallen before September 11.

It will not be an accident but a so-called sign of the times, even if the popular science fiction series for television, Space 1999, begins with the detachment of the moon from its orbit in the explosion of the lunar deposits of radioactive waste , representing how spectacularly wrong solution ideological , as science fiction, the nuclear problem (the story that nuclear waste can be space ship still uses today, however, was fashionable in the seventies and eighties, years of childhood for viewers to Space 1999). "

to add that one of my generation (1972), first still of the Chernobyl accident, was instrumental vision of The day after: the fear of the disaster, the search for possible mental fallout shelters, the comparison of risk compared to other countries other than Italy, fear of the fallout and any after , have always accompanied my childhood paranoid.
I grew up with the fear of atomic destruction, a fear almost disappeared (for the new ideology of involuntary assoribimento post-'89) until 2001, and now finally returned to the guilty folly of the rulers insist the Western way of atomic energy loser.

Each divine curse fall on their wicked leader.

Whats The Difference Between Damask And Jaquard?

Against Nuclear

Fabrizio Illuminati is a physical and intellectual money. This
his enlightened opinion against nuclear power, I thank them for having posted in a discussion on Facebook:

Trying to move beyond the controversy that inevitably charged emotional connotations as come the news of the disaster Japanese, I would try to summarize the main arguments that I think it inadvisable to invest the nuclear energy for our future.

First, a meaningful comparison is given of the new electric power installed worldwide in 2010. Photovoltaics: 16 GW. Nuclear: 0 GW. As for PV, it is a figure almost double that installed worldwide in 2009 (9 GW). This is clearly an exponential growth. We are still about 1% of installed electric power in the world, but it is clear that the solar revolution has begun. That the U.S. is not leading this revolution, sorry, of course (There are reasons, not beautiful, which mean they can not return). What are the countries like Germany, China, Brazil, and others, is much important.

The buffaloes on problems of localization of PV systems and their extension, they feel that repeat periodically, comment elsewhere. It 'true that there is a national problem, linked to phenomena of cultural backwardness, corruption, crime, administration and boards, but, in fact, this is a typical Italian problem be solved (if desired), and that would affect incomparably more catastrophic in the case of location, construction, and operation of nuclear facilities hypothetical.

Turning to nuclear power, before you even discuss issues relating to risk and the problem of waste management, which also are key, just try to think in terms of sheer energy. Nuclear power interests? E 'energy and economic right for the future? There are strong arguments to answer "no", and explain why in the world, basically, you do not build more nuclear power plants for a long time, other than those of replacement, and even those planned by Obama are to replace those that will be obsolete 10-15 years. I try to develop the reasoning for points.

1) rightly says that oil, coal, and natural gas, which are fossil fuels, are destined to run out in time more or less close to, neutral current rate of consumption. Certainly oil is what is made worse in the sense that the most reliable geological estimates, we are close to the historic peak of production (some say it's already happened or is already happening, others favor a date between 2015 and 2030). Then the inexorable decline in production will proceed at the beginning slowly, then faster and faster. Additional resources will come from the exploitation of oil shale and tar sands (especially Canadian and Venezuelan), wells deep sea (not particularly complex and difficult to access), resource polar (not extraordinary, and even more difficult to access). Even without taking into account the enormous environmental damage that the exploitation of these resources would result in additional (but it is foolish not to), in any case it would be expensive and recoveries that would delay the inevitable for maybe 20-30 years. It 's true, there is still a relatively long coal, and it seems there is still a lot of gas (this is already less clear). But burning coal produces CO_2 levels that oil pales in comparison, most other crap remarkable, as the deadly sulfur dioxide SO_2. Even there, however, you retrieve another 50-100 years, if all goes well.

2) E 'then true and sacrosanct that we must reduce dependence on fossil fuels because A) are indeed non-renewable resources, and B) because they contribute in a decisive and essential to global warming.

3) Proponents of nuclear fission (the fusion is yet to come for ever and probably will) argue that the return to nuclear solves both problems A) and B) in paragraph 2) above. In addition, support C) among all possible alternative sources (solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, and all their various possible combinations and supplements, including energy storage systems with batteries, capacitors, hydrogen tanks, air, river basins, etc. etc.), nuclear power is that which provides the lowest cost per kWh of energy produced.

4) Unfortunately, point 3) is false, to a disturbingly large and reliable. In fact, current production and consumption of nuclear fuel cycle are entirely based on uranium, which is part and non-renewable fossil ... exactly like oil and coal. In particular, the only isotope found in nature in appreciable quantities that can be subjected to nuclear fission triggered by thermal neutrons, and therefore suitable for use in power plants is uranium 235. To operate a nuclear power plant must therefore "enrich" the uranium found in nature (through the technique of isotope separation) to increase the percentage of uranium 235. A long, expensive, complex (as you know the Iranians). To operate a power plant should enhance the natural mixture (where the 235 is only 0.7%) up to 235 at a concentration of approximately 20%. To build a bomb, you get to about 90%, and the difficulty increases exponentially with increasing concentration (for this, fortunately, is not easy to build a bomb).

5) How much uranium is still in the world? And when you run out, at the current rate of consumption? It 'difficult to answer precisely these questions, we know (and I quote from Wikipedia source IEA) that "To meet the growing demand for many consumer and producer countries have begun to affect the so-called secondary sources of uranium, that the stocks accumulated and deposited in previous decades (including nuclear warheads). As a result the price of uranium on the world market has suffered a strong surge, rising from $ 7 per pound in 2001 to peak of $ 135 per pound in 2007. In 2001 the price of Uranium accounted for 7.5% of total costs for the production of nuclear energy. According to data from the WNA, in January 2010, the cost current of 115 $ / kg accounts for about 40% on fuel costs, which in turn accounts for about C $ 0.71 on the cost of generation of each kWh..

6) Thus, within a decade, the Fuel costs increased from being 5% of total costs to be 40%. In addition, a few months ago (July 2010) The official announcement, reported by the real media, that the cost per kWh solar cross and fell for the first time under that of the nuclear kWh (about $ 15 c), after 10 years of continuous lowering of the steady rise in the first and second. It seems to me that data speak for themselves. In general, we can be reasonably sure that the production of uranium 235 can peak within a few tens of years and then start to decline even faster.

7) The production of CO_2 linked to the nuclear kWh is modest but not negligible. A central operation essentially does not produce CO_2. However things change when taking into account the processes of uranium mining, construction, MAINTENANCE, and disposal of a central processes that are frighteningly energy-intensive and capital-consuming. In addition, processes are in fact continuous, which accompany the operation of a fission power plant during the entire period of its existence (The fuel rods must be periodically recharged, for example). Here too it is difficult to make very precise accounts, but it can be said that these quantities, of course, lower than those produced by oil, coal and gas, but not negligible, and certainly very much higher than those of CO_2 released, for example, in the production of photovoltaic modules and wind turbines.

I completely overlooked the enormous problems in the operating risks, major accidents, decommissioning, disposal and storage of nuclear waste. I only do this, about the "large areas" that PV irreversibly deprive the beauty of the world, that a whole region of Ukraine, the Chernobyl and around Prypiat is completely uninhabitable by humans and animals since 1986, and that half million of people have been displaced forever. Perhaps it would be better sometimes worry about the beams, before railing against the reeds ...

36 Wk Pregnant And Keep Having Black Poos

Thomas Ariemma and philosophy of cosmetic surgery (Vogue24)

[ Published Vogue.it ]

The young philosopher Thomas Ariemma deals with classic themes of contemporary philosophy "continental": art, body, nakedness, the animal. The recent publication of a book on cosmetic surgery, against the false beauty (The Melangolo) gives us the opportunity to ask him some questions.

In a few lines of his latest novel, Houellebecq enhances the aesthetic surgery, particularly for breast, saying that perhaps ten years to procrastinate the end of the couple's sex life. It makes a point of view hyperbolically untrue, but the element of truth may lie in the fact that cosmetic surgery would not aim for the "beauty" but the sexual attractiveness (as extended domain of the struggle) in society of the spectacle?

No, I think the issue remains that of beauty, or rather the false beauty (as I prefer to call it). What happens in sexuality is only one aspect (albeit important) application of that falsehood. The account that emerges from the novel Houellebecq is important, because it shows how the spread works of cosmetic surgery: pitfalls in everyday living. If you do not "redo" (in this expression is key dedicated an entire chapter of my book), you lose: beauty, self esteem, job etc ... We live in an era where the spread of cosmetic surgery has a real "terrorism of false beauty", ie the aesthetic conformism.

course, the aesthetic conformism of which you speak is not an isolated phenomenon but part of man's own one-dimensional mentality of contemporary society. Focus on aesthetic care and surgical body provides a critical perspective privileged?

More than privileged field, I would say that this is the first point from which I chose to ask questions of philosophy. My previous research focused on the philosophical concepts of exposure, nudity, singularity. The spread of cosmetic surgery has emerged as an issue at some point unavoidable. Question, in philosophical aesthetics, has never been addressed specifically. My book is the first text in the world, to my knowledge, philosophy of cosmetic surgery. Since the spread of the infection as I try to show, you can enter the important philosophical questions about order and chaos, and on all sides, on the perception of self and the world, trends not only aesthetic but also of our political culture.

you consider the false beauty as an eminently cultural phenomenon. But do not believe that there is a natural foundation of beauty "true" (I think to some psychological studies on the perfection of perfect proportions that - contrary to popular belief - not would change the course of human history)?

The only basis for which I is the natural beauty of diversity. The beauty can be universal only if it remains irreducible. It seems a contradiction, but it is not at all. If the beauty bound to a specific criterion, we find ourselves in a false beauty, circumscribed, limited, and therefore no longer universal. Support a unique beauty, based of course, is a bit 'support for a human skin color naturally superior to others. The aesthetic pluralism is the true foundation.

Programing Motorola Starchoice Remote

Small grammar of non-violence (no violence in the preface)

1. Basic terminology.

We start from a fundamental observation: it may seem strange, scholars tend not to use the word "pacifism", which appears to be an imprecise concept and trope often a negative connotation (the word is used by opponents of the peace movements). The term "pacifism" and "nonviolence," certainly among the most popular and used (often inappropriately) by the mass media, are not synonymous. As it says Nanni Salio, often "the common language and especially the one used by the media has a dual negative function: some possible hidden meanings, especially alternative and other vehicles, stereotyped, functional to the dominant culture, the idea that you want to show and policy decisions that are to be imposed. [...]» (Salio, The Power of Nonviolence, p.136).

The common language, therefore, also with regard to the theme of peace needs analysis clarifying to avoid confusion and exploitation, for more on the agenda.

We can try to define some terms more often:

The anti-militarism is' ideology and opposition to the domination of the military on society "(Muller, Dictionary of nonviolence, p.22).

Pacifism can be defined as "the intransigent refusal, moral, violence even in the absence of radical alternatives, and also for the defense of others, sometimes coinciding with the total liability (absolutist pacifism) (Cozzo, p.28). As Muller notes, "the pacifist discourse is disqualified when it leaves believe that armaments that are the causes of war, presenting their removal as a necessary and sufficient condition for peace. To promote a policy of disarmament, it is important to think about instead of the "functional equivalent of war" to nations that offer the means to defend itself against any aggression.

Because perceived negatively by the public, the word "pacifism" is spent in the dominant discourses used to describe the peace movements that are opposed to various aspects of military policy of the States [...]. At the same time one of the safest means to discredit a movement and to disqualify naming. In fact, in most cases this name, who wants to be an accusation, is given to movements that develop analysis and choose targets that differ radically from those of "pacifism" (Muller, Dictionary of nonviolence, p.94).

Nevertheless, especially in the first half of the twentieth century, the authors now designate as non-violent use of the word did also call themselves.

The term nonviolence is the literal translation of the Sanskrit term ahimsa, Himsa and consists of a deprivation, damage, violence. The word ahimsa means an intentional gradient that could be rendered as "lack of desire to harm, to kill." Other proposals, such innocence, however, seem to lose something of their original meaning. It was always Capitini to propose to write the word without the hyphen separator, so as to emphasize non-violence is not violence but a simple denial of self and positive value. (We, too, when we quote, always write "nonviolence"). Gandhi instead to stress this negative element, "In fact, the very expression" non-violence ", a word negative, it indicates an effort to eliminate the violence that is inevitable in life." (Gandhi, Theory and practice of non- nonviolence, p.77).

The term resistance passive was used by Gandhi himself until he realized that the expression was in danger of pacifism to suggest a person of religious, nothing in the face of injustice. Gandhi also wanted an Indian word for a form of struggle in India.

Satyagraha is the new word is formed from words in the native language of Gandhi (the gujurati). It literally means power of truth (Satya: Truth, graha: force). Gandhi adopted the term to distinguish the "nonviolence of the strong" from passive resistance, which may coincide with the "nonviolence of the weak." The term movement

Issues for peace means various social forces, intellectuals and professionals who work for peace, the theoretical and practical. "The peace movement has always been a" strange "movement, composite, heterogeneous, with internal components that come from different cultural traditions and often conflicting, opinions differ with and without, in Italy more than elsewhere, a recognized leadership authority. [...] It would be more correct to speak of the peace movement in the plural instead of singular, since in reality the movement for peace in the singular is "a movement that does not exist". " On the other hand "the first confusion is to use as synonyms The term peace movement and peace movement. It may seem a subtle distinction, almost useless, but it is not. Throughout the literature is used to distinguish a generic anti-war movement, that brings together some historical moments in large sectors of public opinion, some well-defined political and religious forces, the peace movement meant as an organized and permanent with its well-defined program of political action vindicated over time, not only contingent and generally opposed to the wars, but constructive, based on extensive theoretical and cultural "(Salio, The Power of Nonviolence, p 52, p .136).

Finally, with the technical term of peace research is a set of doctrines, academic and non academic studying the problem of peace in the prospect of a renewed (more comprehensive, holistic) paradigm of the humanities. Its initiator is the great theorist Johan Galtung. The importance of peace research is to provide rigorous concepts for a theory of peace and nonviolence, ripping DefInt the confusion of common sense, a very vital issue.

The guiding concept of this book is that of nonviolence. Regarding the definition of non-violence and the distinction between the types of non-violence must be examined a bit 'closer at least thought Gandhi, whose writings are to be pointed as the origin theory of modern nonviolence.

2. ABC of nonviolence.

begin with the words, Nanni Salio, one of the most important Italian scholars of peace research: "The idea of \u200b\u200bnon-violence is not new, but" as old as the hills, "as Gandhi taught, although his own merit it moved with full dignity in the same field of politics.

Nonviolence is opposed to all forms of violence, both direct and structural [ie, inherent injustice of the economic and social system], without justifying the action to one for delete the other: break the vicious cycle of violence by refusing to make use of a priori. And to clarify this choice nonviolence goes even further, rejecting the violence that occurs at the cultural level, hidden in the folds of our religious, moral, social (Salio, Gulf Wars, p.21).

Gandhian nonviolence is twofold: ahimsa and satyagraha, abstention from violence and violence against others. A possible

concise definition is: conflict theory seeks to identify the means of struggle that can lead to greater reduction of violence in all its forms (Cozzo, p.23). This definition has the merit to clear the field dall'equivoco that nonviolence is inaction or, worse, renounce violence against direct and structural (ie, "filed" in the social structures). Nonviolence is not a simple negation of violence and conflict but, as suggested by Capitini spelling without the hyphen, can be thought of as a positive concept and constructive.

Simone Weil's insight that the violence, objectifies, dehumanizes, and that is what anyone who becomes fulfilled, can provide an adequate philosophical background. Nonviolence is the rejection of dehumanization, which necessarily arises from the violence even if it were implemented her claims for the "right", as in the case of self-violence.

nonoviolenza The choice is based on the ethics of suffering violence in a conflict rather than inflict it, believing that the enemy can be converted by the example of non-violent. While the violence inflicted to avoid suffering, but the nonviolent suffering and not to inflict any harm in an attempt to "transform" the violent opponent, believing that by doing so the opponent can be improved morally and eventually abandon its position violent . The alternative

violence / nonviolence corresponds to that between the short range consistent of a certain quality of existence and purpose of the simple preservation of his physical integrity, freedom and life, rather than doing violence even degrade autodifensiva the nonoviolento choose to keep a different (better) quality of confiding in his exemplary moral and universal "contagious".

Violence is not canceled by non-violent but in a sense "changes direction" means "soldier" nonviolence is exposed, he puts himself as a possible beraglio of violence: "The conflict is accepted in its entirety, without any fear or liabilities, but in a form that energy is not is used to destroy the enemy but to persuade him, and therefore preferring to cause suffering to themselves rather than him, but not to psychologically blackmail victim with an attitude but sincere desire not to make anyone "(ibid., p.75) .

Nonviolence is therefore aimed at reaching a settlement of conflicts without resorting to violent means. Dire nonviolence is to say the struggle for peace and justice (peace nonviolent). You see then how the practice of nonviolence requires dedication and courage as, if not more military heroism.

is often argued that violence is intrinsic to human nature. But, he argued already Gandhi, "the fact that there are still many people alive in the world shows that this is not based on force of arms but on the strength of truth and love. So the largest and most conclusive proof of the success of this force must be seen in the fact that despite all the wars that took place in the world, it continues to exist "(Theory and practice of non-violence, p.65).

In the thought of Gandhi, violence is not something "natural" that we can and must oppose with a cultural strategy, "Non-violence is the law of our species as violence is the law of the brutes. The spirit of the beast is asleep, and he knows no other law that physical force. The dignity of man requires obedience to a higher law, the power of the spirit "(ibid., p.20).

2.2 Forms of nonviolence.

distinguished Gandhi nonviolence of the strong, or satyagraha, or non-violence as a conviction, the nonviolence of the weak, or duragraha, or passive resistance.

A definition of satyagraha is as follows: "the method of safeguarding the rights through personal suffering" (Gandhi, as old as the mountains, 1993, Knopf).

The satyagraha is active struggle against violence and, therefore, not merely a failure to violence and is not due to tactics or strategy. Nonviolence satyagraha is not complete elimination of violence for Gandhi because violence is never entirely eliminated by the existence of "Strictly speaking, no activity and no occupation is possible without a degree, albeit limited, of violence. The same life is impossible without some degree of violence. What we must do is to limit this violence as much as possible "(Gandhi, Theory and practice of non-violence, p.77).

passive resistance, however, may represent the initial phase of violent conflict, during which you do not feel enough strong enough to take up arms. Under the guidance of a leader and a group leader who profess non-violence as a conviction, even passive resistance can develop in the direction of satyagraha. What

obviously different from the nonviolence of the weak is the failure to act of cowardice, which Gandhi is preferable to the use of arms: "Although violence is not lawful, when used in self-defense or protection of the vulnerable it is an act courage, far better than cowardly submission "(ibid, p.22).

You can then distinguish between positive and non-violence nonviolence negative: the first is "to make it easier to make our party the nonviolent actions that the group endorses "and the second is to" make it harder to do things which he opposes a nonviolent group "(Galtung, Gandhi today, p.152).

Since the non-violent approach involves several dimensions of the human, social and political life as a private and emotional, the ethical implications of non-violence are considerable, and perhaps primary. Here is another possible definition of non-violence, given by Aldo Capitini: choice of a way of thinking and acting that is not oppression or destruction of any living being, especially human beings.

2.3 ethics of nonviolence.

fundamental characteristic of non-violence is the reconsideration of the means-ends relationships. Ethics policy (Western) modern Machiavellian prevailing principle that the end may justify the means. For non-violence, on the contrary, we have the principle of homogeneity of means and ends: a good end must be achieved through means good, because "impure means producing an end impure" (Gandhi, Theory and practice of nonviolence, p.126) .

The categorical imperative of non-violence is not the negative, "abstain from violence," but the even more challenging "Act so that your action can lead to greater reduction of violence in the long term and in all its forms "(Pontara, Welcome. in theory and practice of non-violence, p.XXXII-XXXIII). And according to this Pontara imperative "is part of a system of rules each of which is provided with equal validity and that, when coming into conflict with one or more of the others, can be overwhelmed by that or those. Yes you can give situations where the use of violence, although forbidden by the imperative mentioned, however, will be sanctioned as legitimate as requested by one or more rules to an extent greater than is allowed by the imperative of non-violence "(ibid.). This explains why Gandhi himself, unlike Tolstoy's religious and pacifist, believed it was better to give than to commit violence to confront violence by mere cowardice, "Killing can be a duty. [...] We destroy the lives of all that we deem necessary to the sustenance of our body. [...] For the sake of others then, in the interest of humanity, we kill wild animals. When the lions or tigers threaten their villages, the residents consider it their duty to kill them or kill them.

In some cases you may need to pay even human blood. Suppose a man is taken from a killing spree and starts to turn with a sword in his hand killing anyone who gets in front, and nobody has the courage to capture him alive. Whoever kills the fool will get the gratitude of the community and will be considered a charitable man.

From the point of view of ahimsa is clearly the duty of every kill such a man. " (Gandhi, Theory and practice of non-violence, p.69-70)

Nonviolence does not even have to equate all forms of life: "My non-violence is not simply a form of goodness to all living creatures. [...]» (Ibid., p.75).

Gandhi has often responded to those who posed questions about practical support for non-violence that violence in some cases it is essential, but not between cowardice and violence must certainly choose the latter: "When my eldest son asked me what I should have done this if it was in 1908 when I was attacked and nearly killed, if he should escape or would use his physical strength, as it could and wanted, and defend myself, I replied that it was his right to defend even by resorting to violence "(ibid., p.18).

In particular, it is immoral violence left at the mercy of those in need of defense: "They looted the homes of some villagers. They fled, leaving their wives, children and relatives to the mercy of looters. When I reproached them for cowardice that had proved not doing their duty, they boldly appealed to the doctrine of nonviolence. I publicly denounced their conduct and I said that my non-violence fully justified the violence used by those who believed in nonviolence and that they were called to defend the honor of their women and their children. Non-violence is not an excuse for the cowardly but it is the supreme virtue of the brave. The practice of non-violence requires more courage the practice of arms. Cowardice is wholly incompatible with the non-violence. "(Ibid., p.23).

2.4 Techniques of nonviolence.

Gandhi has experienced in decades of struggle because nonviolence requires strong self-control and ability to organize groups and non-violent strategies. Beyond the purely ethical dimension of nonviolence are therefore true techniques of nonviolent conflict management.

The non-cooperation or non-cooperation is "the essential principle of the strategy of nonviolent [...] You must then organize the resistance by inviting each member of the group or community to withdraw support to the leaders of proven injustice, thus depriving them of the competition which require to ensure their dominance "(Muller, Dictionary of nonviolence, p.80), it should be noted that non-cooperation as a first step may be perfectly legal and only later, exhausted all legal means can lead to disobedience civil.

Civil Disobedience (a term coined by HD Thoreau) is the strongest action of non-cooperation. "When the law no longer fulfills its function on the contrary, it is better to defend the interests of the privileged, the rich and powerful against, instead, the interests of the underprivileged, where the law covers and guarantees injustice, not is only a right but a duty to disobey it.

this is clearly not preaching disobedience to the law in a systematic way, it is simply not systematically preach obedience to the law "(Muller, Meaning of nonviolence, p.23).

Fasting or more properly the hunger strike is intended to exert social pressure on the party to put an end to situations of injustice. It is a typical non-violent action based on the example: "The more coercion is reduced, the more we need to give examples that have, for themselves, a persuasive, sometimes out of the ordinary" (Capitini, The techniques of nonviolence, p.54). It should be noted, however, that if it's blackmail, the hunger strike ceases to be nonviolent, "There is blackmail when you leave to understand, more or less explicitly, that those who went on strike [...] they drop the responsibility of their death, if there will be death - and can not be ruled out - the opponent. It is an unacceptable blackmail. The opponent takes upon himself the responsibility for the injustice which leads to a hunger strike, but if I lead a hunger strike, I take my responsibilities to the end and not to fall on others the responsibility of the risks I face "(Muller, cit., p. 18).

The boycott is "a method of non-cooperation in economic terms: the refusal to benefit from another of my purchasing power, which then becomes a power that I really am opposed to that of my opponent" (ibid, p.19 ).

The strike is the best known and most used form of non-cooperation, "understood that the strike was a nonviolent technique when violence does nothing, not even in the difficult case of non-strikers or krumiri, and is not motivated by hatred those from whom off the cooperation. [...] The right to strike is recognized, and it is clear that the company should be able to pay the cost of receiving change in the evolution of the struggle by violent means in nonviolent ways, the rise of classes that are in the lower, the advantage of freedom of expression problems. (Capitini, cit., P.90).

3. Peace movements: typology.

have been proposed various kinds of peace movements.

In The problem of war and the ways of peace, Norberto Bobbio (which from the standpoint of terminology of "pacifism" and identified with the kind of non-violence which is radical species) distinguish different types of active pacifism, in its subdivided according to whether they address the means by which to strive for peace, or institutions, or to men. We have so instrumental pacifism, pacifism and pacifism institutional finalist.

Pacifism is instrumental to Bobbio the form of the movement for peace which is merely to advocate disarmament. This form of pacifism was the limit of neglecting to consider the consequences of disarmament, ignoring the possible positive effect of violence (the theorists of nonviolence effect excluded). Also it would be so ineffective as practicable but no guarantee on the behavior of all stakeholders. In fact, unilateral disarmament, supported by thinkers like Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russell, Simone Weil, can not be dismissed too easily. Especially since Gorbachev and Shevardnadze specifically implemented, and successfully, a policy of "disarmament asymmetrical '(see Salio, The Power of Nonviolence, p.42).

The institutional pacifism, however, can be legal (the war depends on the existence of the state as such: it is necessary to overcome a global superstar) or social (the war depends on a form of state based on the exploitation of class status should be abolished capitalist). The effort to research the causes and remedies of the war here is greater than the instrumental pacifism. Inside

pacifism finalist, so true peace can be achieved by acting upon men and not on institutions, Bobbio then distinguishes a spiritual tendency, in explaining the moral and religious violence, and a materialist, who sees a man being the biological where violence is understood in psychological and sociological.

A different classification of the movements for peace is that which distinguishes between religious pacifism (conscientious objection), liberal internationalism, anti-conscription (the fight for the preservation of civil liberties), the socialist tradition of resistance to war (anti-militarism) , socialist internationalism, feminist anti-militarism, pacifism, radical (Gandhian non-violence), and also before the collapse of the Soviet bloc were also highly relevant pacifism and Soviet nuclear pacifism.

further classification could occur separately peace movements who struggle against all war, or against a particular war (eg the Gulf) or against a particular aspect of war (nuclear weapons).

A special version of the peace movement is a nonviolent movement environmentalist. The premise of this form of attention to human-nature is that violence is violence even to the environment to humans, since they are closely tied to conservation ecosystem in which peoples and cultures have developed and live.

4. Ideas of peace.

On the very idea of \u200b\u200bpeace there are three main concepts, developed in the course of human history and culture.

The negative peace is understood as the mere absence of war "is revealed soon enough. The negative peace is realized in fact as armed peace, as a truce between war and the other .[...] The idea of \u200b\u200bnegative peace condemns the violence directed, meaning the violence which is exercised directly on natural [.. .] but justifies the war as a means of defense against attacks and is silent on any other type of violence, structural, less obvious but no less serious. On a person can use force [...] indirectly, by omission, by depriving it of the need to survive [...]» (Salio, the Gulf Wars, p.16). This idea of \u200b\u200bpeace "absolutizes the value of freedom and material well-being, and therefore the first-generation human rights" (ibid., p.18).

Proponents of so-called positive peace, however, deemed insufficient a peace that is not accompanied by social justice, given that injustice provokes violence. The idea of \u200b\u200bpositive peace highlights the value of justice and balance ecological (in the absence of a balanced relationship with the planet's resources can not be peace, upholding a tradition of nonviolent thought). This idea of \u200b\u200bpeace be considered as eligible war as an instrument of liberation and shines a spotlight on a "second generation" of human rights linked to the idea of \u200b\u200bjustice.

The idea of \u200b\u200bnonviolent peace finally wants to put together both the values \u200b\u200bthat emerge in the two previous ideas of peace, "while peace absolutizes negative freedom and positive peace justice, nonviolence makes it clear that a society built on a only value is in fact a non-desirable, in which the same value will be the first or then walked on. In other words there is no true freedom without justice and there is no true justice without freedom "(ibid., p.16). And liberty and justice, as good ends can not be pursued by unfair means, or violent.

What is the idea of \u200b\u200bpeace prevailing at the present time? The paradigm of the 'pre-emptive attack "appears to be behind the idea of \u200b\u200bnegative peace (the need to enforce the peace with weapons), but with arguments borrowed from the idea of \u200b\u200bpositive peace, in an attempt to justify the war and violence with the intention of bringing all oppressed peoples freedom and justice, which instead reduce their as a result of the war.

5. The future is nonviolent?

After the 11 September attack, which led the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, might have seemed that the strategy of nonviolence was a long time to defeat. But since the impasse that led the war is increasingly under the eyes of world public opinion, even the chattering "interventionist" now appear more calm, and you start talking to retreat even from America. Here, then, that the situation returns to be favorable because the proposals of the movement for peace are felt. Without

nonviolent mediation there is no future planetary imaginable, unless you want to conceive and the possibility of human existence increasingly militarized worldwide. One witnesses in this case for further development (or devolution) of the types of companies classified by the French philosopher Michel Foucault: after the disciplinary society of the Ancien Régime, after the current control society (ideological, mass media, police ) we arrive at the processing (of a substantial portion) of the company in military society. This is what the theorist Johan Galtung's peace (in AA.VV. Movements for peace, I) intellectual style called "brown", the police and militaristic mode of life and thought could emerge in the future if it becomes established in the style green, libertarian and environmentalist (other "styles" are: Blue Liberal, socialist-red).

The nightmare of a militarized society, which destroy natural and economic resources, it is perhaps impossible for the same, relative economic weakness and ideological neoconservatives around the world (the same Galtung, drawing obviously empty criticism of "anti-Americanism" involves the collapse of the U.S. by 2020).

But we must be clear to avoid self-delusion: the movement for peace, understanding by this term the permanent collection of organizations that are working for decades to build a nonviolent peace throughout the world, has not the power to cause significant acceleration of history. The same adherence of the masses to the ideal of peace has its own historical dynamics detected by a chart (see chart Salio). Yet women and men around the world are committed to the peace by working methodically to ensure that the transformation of our society go to the Green and not to the Bruno.

nonviolent peace prevails not automatically, not the result of the magnificent and progressive, or the inevitable result of historical progress, linear or dialectical or revolutionary events of individual, "momentous". In contrast to what it considered passive pacifism (Bobbio) typical nineteenth-positivist optimism that the scientific and technical progress have led to the extinction of the wars, no invisible hand guiding humanity on the path of dialogue and cooperation, non-violent.

The construction of a nonviolent future peace, "peace by peaceful means" (Galtung) can not be but the result of fruitful interaction between the organized action of elites specializing in peace research and the willingness and commitment all those who can join the movement for peace.

Bibliography:

• AA.VV., movements for peace, Edizioni Gruppo Abele, Torino, 1989
• AA.VV., Nonviolence way. History of the Nonviolent Movement from 1962 to 1992, editions of the nonviolent movement, Verona, 1998
• AA.VV., Acting nonviolence. Prospects for the Liberation of globalization, Proceedings of the Communist Party of the PRC, San Servolo 28 to 19 February 2004, Venice.
• H. Arendt. Violence, Practices, Parma, 2001
• J. Bennet, resistance against the German occupation of Denmark, Editions of the Nonviolent Movement, Perugia, 1979.
• Id, in Norway in nonviolent resistance, Perugia, 1979.
• N. Bobbio, The problem of war and the ways of peace, the Mulino, Bologna, 1997. Brock-Utne B.
• , peace is a woman, Edizioni Gruppo Abele, Torino, 1991.
• Capitini A., The techniques of nonviolence, Shadow Line, Milan, 1989.
• Id, Opposition and liberation, Shadow Line, 1991.
• A. Cozzo, Nonviolent Conflict. Philosophy and practices of common struggle, Mimesis, 2004.
• R. Diodato, Pacifism, Editrice Bibliographical, Milan, 1995.
• WB Gallie, Philosophy of peace and war, Il Mulino, Bologna, 1993.
• J. Galtung, there are alternatives! Four roads for safety, Edizioni Gruppo Abele, Torino, 1987.
• Id, Gandhi today, Edizioni Gruppo Abele, Torino, 1987.
• Id, Peace by peaceful means, Esperia, Milan, 2000.
• MK Gandhi, The Theory and Practice of Nonviolence, Einaudi, Torino, 1996.
• Id, old as the mountains, Mondadori, Milano, 1993.
• Lanza del Vasto GG, What is non-violence, Jaca Book, Milano, 1978.
• A. Brown and P. Sansonetti, neither a man nor a penny, Baldini Castoldi Dalai, 2003.
• Muller JM, Meaning of nonviolence, Editions of the Nonviolent Movement (non-violent action Papers No. 7) Turin
• Id, Simone Weil. The need for nonviolence, Edizioni Gruppo Abele, Torino, 1994
• Id, Lexicon of non-violence, Satyagraha Publishing, 1992
• Pontara G., Introduction to MK Gandhi: Theory and practice of nonviolence. Since the collapse of the Berlin Wall to the new world disorder, Einaudi, Torino, 1996.
• Salio G., The Power of Nonviolence, Edizioni Gruppo Abele, Torino, 1995.
• Id, the Gulf Wars, Edizioni Gruppo Abele, Torino, 1991.
• Sémelin J., unarmed in the face of Hitler, published by Probe, Turin, 1991
• G. Sharp, Politics of nonviolent, EGA, Torino, 1985-1997.
• S. Weil, On War, Practices, Parma, 1996.

(From without violence. Ideas and stories of peace movements , edited by Edward Acotto, "Days of History" 38, The Unit, 2004)

Best Marlin 30-30 Ammo

The truth about some parents and some children a story to me fundamental Julio Cortazar (Stories cronopios and famas)

cronopios I almost never have children, but when they lose their heads and extraordinary things happen. For example, a Cronopio has a son and immediately fell into a trance and is firmly convinced that his son is the epitome of beauty and in his veins chemistry flowing full, with here and there all islands arts and civic poetry. Then this Cronopio can not stand the sight of her first child without great reverence and address expressions of respectful homage.

son, of course, hate him thoroughly. When he reached the age to go to school, his father enrolled him in first grade and the baby is happy among other small cronopios, famas and hopes. As midday approaches, however, his joy because he knows that decreases the output will be waiting for her father and saw him raise his hands and say many things, such as: Buenas salenas Cronopio Cronopio, as good and strong and healthy and scholar, capable and respectful of all children.
So the famas and the junior hopes scompisciano laughing on the sidewalk and the little Cronopio hate from the depths of the heart will eventually make him the father and bad jokes and communion among the first military service. But cronopios not blame them too much because they hated their parents, and indeed it seems that this hatred is a name of liberty or of the wider world.

Make A Dartboard Stand

Pierre Klossowsky Dispatches

I would like someone to explain to me why the post in which I write about him was so successful stratospheric : Klossowsky that attracts or is under the evil brother of the painter?